Re: [PATCH v2] Document pack v4 format

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 5, 2013, 16:52 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8DKL9KnPAXcf+NPU_Y5J1Dz_pYxSpONN4LxcQVi1JOBYw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1309050131000.14472@syhkavp.arg>

On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Now the pack index v3 probably needs to be improved a little, again to
> accommodate completion of thin packs.  Given that the main SHA1 table is
> now in the main pack file, it should be possible to still carry a small
> SHA1 table in the index file that corresponds to the appended objects
> only. This means that a SHA1 search will have to first use the main SHA1
> table in the pack file as it is done now, and if not found then use the
> SHA1 table in the index file if it exists.  And of course
> nth_packed_object_sha1() will have to be adjusted accordingly.

What if the sender prepares the sha-1 table to contain missing objects in advance? The sender should know what base objects are missing. Then we only need to append objects at the receiving end and verify that all new objects are also present in the sha-1 table.

-- 
Duy