git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: gc and repack ignore .git/*HEAD when checking reachability

From
Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date
Jul 9, 2016, 16:45 UTC
Message-ID
<CACsJy8A6fiPUtNZow_oOEQSi64GMxA2Jy84h4OznaSxBMePtbQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<20160709140931.GA3185@x>
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote:
Show 34 quoted lines
> On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 09:35:24AM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> > Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> writes:
>> >
>> > > That sounds reasonable.  And if they *do* end up taking any time to
>> > > traverse, it's because they weren't reachable from other anchoring
>> > > points, so taking the extra time to traverse them seems fine.
>> >
>> > The only thing that is hard is to clearly define _what_ are the new
>> > anchoring points.
>> >
>> > It cannot be "anything directly under .git that has all-caps name
>> > that ends with _HEAD".  The ones we write we know are going to be
>> > removed at some point in time (e.g. "git reset", "git bisect reset",
>> > "git merge --abort", etc.).  We do not have any control on random
>> > ones that the users and third-party tools leave behind, holding onto
>> > irrelevant objects forever.
>>
>> Please note that bisect already uses the (transient) refs/bisect/
>> namespace. So I do not think we need to take specific care of the
>> BISECT_* files.
>>
>> If we had thought of it back then, we could have used such a transient
>> namespace also for FETCH_HEAD, CHERRY_PICK_HEAD and also for detached
>> HEADs (which we should have called "unnamed branches").
>>
>> Now, how about special-casing *just* these legacy files in gc: HEAD,
>> FETCH_HEAD, MERGE_HEAD and CHERRY_PICK_HEAD? Any new transient refs should
>> live in the refs/ namespace, which is already handled.
>
> That seems workable as well; in that case, we should also document this
> (in the git-gc manpage at a minimum), and explicitly suggest creating
> refs in refs/ but outside of refs/heads/ and refs/tags/, rather than
> directly in .git/.

Not just outside refs/heads and refs/tags. It has to be in a specified namespace like refs/worktree/ or something (we are close to be ready for that). We could update the man page about git-gc shortcomings now, but I think we should wait until refs/worktree (or something like that) becomes true before suggesting more.

-- 
Duy
Previous: Josh TriplettNext: Johannes Schindelin
Message 12 of 27 in “gc and repack ignore .git/*HEAD when checking reachability”
  1. Josh TriplettJul 8, 2016
  2. Junio C HamanoJul 8, 2016
  3. Josh TriplettJul 8, 2016
  4. Junio C HamanoJul 8, 2016
  5. Theodore Ts'oJul 8, 2016
  6. Junio C HamanoJul 8, 2016
  7. Theodore Ts'oJul 8, 2016
  8. Josh TriplettJul 9, 2016
  9. Josh TriplettJul 8, 2016
  10. Johannes SchindelinJul 9, 2016
  11. Josh TriplettJul 9, 2016
  12. Duy NguyenJul 9, 2016
  13. Johannes SchindelinJul 10, 2016
  14. Duy NguyenJul 10, 2016
  15. Johannes SchindelinJul 10, 2016
  16. Duy NguyenJul 10, 2016
  17. Johannes SchindelinJul 11, 2016
  18. Junio C HamanoJul 11, 2016
  19. Johannes SchindelinJul 12, 2016
  20. Jeff KingJul 12, 2016
  21. Duy NguyenJul 12, 2016
  22. Jeff KingJul 12, 2016
  23. Duy NguyenJul 12, 2016
  24. Johannes SchindelinJul 13, 2016
  25. Duy NguyenJul 13, 2016
  26. Johannes SchindelinJul 13, 2016
  27. Duy NguyenJul 15, 2016

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.