Re: [RFC] pack-objects: compression level for non-blobs
- From
Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 2, 2013, 02:23 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CACsJy8D0fQ4-DiLx=mqm16Om829Zcno2oTi5F1c78H615-Hivw@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAJo=hJsZedd0kfYJnXPhcud8bz3mgU0NMf6O6-_PY1yqv-EfDg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
>> And I was wrong. At least since 1b4bb16 (pack-objects: optimize >> "recency order" - 2011-06-30) commits are spread out and can be mixed >> with trees too. Grouping them back defeats what Junio did in that >> commit, I think. > > I think you misunderstand what 1b4bb16 does. Junio uses a layout > similar to what JGit has done for years. Commits are packed, then > trees, then blobs. Only annotated tags are interspersed with commits. > The decision on where to place tags is different, but has a similar > purpose.
This is embarrassing. I looked at verify-pack output and somehow saw trees mixed with commits. I must have read it wrong. "git verify-pack -v <pack>|awk '{print $2;}'|uniq on recently created pack shows that only tags and commits are mixed. Sorry for the noise.
-- Duy