Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix prune/gc problem with multiple worktrees

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 2, 2016, 09:53 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8DjKo-HcyG6sKhhvx8vtySn6VTTP-E6vX2uKNEJgjouZg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqshwwzyee.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

(from patch 4/4 mail)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

>> +     path = xstrdup(worktree_git_path(wt, "logs/refs/bisect"));
>> +     if (file_exists(path))
>> +             handle_one_reflog(path, NULL, 0, &cb);
>> +     free(path);
>> +}
>
> `refs/bisect` is not a single reference. It is a namespace that contains
> references with names like `refs/bisect/bad` and
> `refs/bisect/good-66106691a1b71e445fe5e4d6b8b043dffc7dfe4c`.

Yeah I missed that. I'm not going to write another directory walker to collect all logs/refs/bisect/*. I didn't add pending objects for refs/bisect/* of other worktrees either. At that point waiting for the new ref iterator makes more sense...

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:06 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> This series makes sure that objects referenced by all worktrees are
>> marked reachable so that we don't accidentally delete objects that are
>> being used. Previously per-worktree references in index, detached HEAD
>> or per-worktree reflogs come from current worktree only, not all
>> worktrees.
>
> I'll let this topic simmer on the list for now, instead of picking
> it up immediately to 'pu', as Michael in $gmane/296068 makes me
> wonder if we want to keep piling on the current "worktree ref
> iterations are bolted on" or if we want to first clean it up, whose
> natural fallout hopefully would eliminate the bug away.

So what should be the way forward? My intention was having something that can fix the problem for now, even if a bit hacky while waiting for ref iterator to be ready, then convert to use it and clean things up, because I don't how long ref-iterator would take and losing data is serous enough that I'd like to fix it soon. If we go with "fix soon then convert to ref-iterator later", then I will drop the logs/bisect/* check, checking logs/HEAD alone should be good enough. Otherwise I'll prepare a series on top of ref-iterator.

-- 
Duy