From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 22:24:39 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] change the unpack limit threshold to a saner value
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:

> 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.