Re: auto gc again
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
> So you have 17.1 seconds for a single pack vs 18.4 seconds for 66 packs.
>
> Compare that to 24.9s without that patch.
Very interesting --- why should it affect a single pack case at all?
Show 6 quoted lines
> And I still have some further optimizations to implement eventually
> (http://marc.info/?l=git&m=118062793413099&w=2), but which would
> probably make a significant difference only in the hundreds-of-packs
> case anyway.
>
> So I really think that the default gc.autopacklimit could be raised.
Thanks, let's raise it to 50 then.
But I am still puzzled...