Re: [PATCH] change the unpack limit threshold to a saner value
- From
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
- Date
- Dec 6, 2006, 22:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vejrcy860.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612061420410.2630@xanadu.home>
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Let's assume the average object size is x. Given n objects, the needed > storage size is n*(x + b), where b is the average wasted block size on > disk. > ... > This is why I think the current default treshold should be 3 instead of > the insane value of 5000. But since it feels a bit odd to go from 5000 > to 3 I setled on 10.
I see you are optimizing for disk footprint, and this will result in tons of tiny packs left between "repack -a".
I have not benched it yet, but the runtime pack handling code was written assuming we have only a handful of big packs; I suspect this change would affect the performance at runtime in quite a bad way.