Re: [BUG] `git push` sends unnecessary objects
- From
Javier Mora <cousteaulecommandant@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 25, 2023, 14:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAH1-q0jGQBPZVYja3Sg2Xv4YGAxcUsnb1rL4MALKxCoywi0B=A@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <ZQb9Thxa5X-Fo5mj@debian.me>
Apparently if I do that in two commits (one to move the dir, and a second one add the file), and then push all that after the second commit, this doesn't happen -- the resulting push will only contain 6 objects (2 commits, 3 trees, and 1 file), and be a few bytes large.
El dom, 17 sept 2023 a las 14:21, Bagas Sanjaya (<bagasdotme@gmail.com>) escribió:
Show 80 quoted lines
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 11:59:35PM +0100, Javier Mora wrote:
> > I came across this issue accidentally when trying to move a directory
> > containing a very large file, and deleting another file in that
> > directory while I was at it.
> > It seems to be caused by `pack.useSparse=true` being the default since
> > v2.27 (which I found out after spending quite a while manually
> > bisecting and compiling git since I noticed that this didn't happen in
> > v2.25; commit de3a864 introduces this regression).
> >
> > * Expected:
> > Pushing a commit that moves a file without modifying it shouldn't
> > require sending a blob object for that file, since the remote server
> > already has that blob object.
> > * Observed:
> > Pushing a commit that moves a directory containing a file and also
> > adds/deletes other files in that directory will for some reason also
> > send blobs for all the files in that directory, even the ones that
> > were already in the remote.
> > * Consequences:
> > This has a very big impact in push times for very small commits
> > that just move around files, if those files are very big (I had this
> > happen with a >100MB file over a problematic connection... yikes!)
> > * Note:
> > The commit introducing the regression does warn about possible
> > scenarios involving a special arrangement of exact copies across
> > directories, but these are not "copies", I just moved a file, which
> > seems like a rather common operation.
> >
> > Code snippet for reproduction:
> > ```
> > mkdir TEST_git
> > cd TEST_git
> >
> > mkdir -p local remote/origin.git
> > cd remote/origin.git
> > git init --bare
> > cd ../../local
> > git init
> > git remote add origin file://"${PWD%/*}"/remote/origin.git
> >
> > mkdir zig
> > for i in a b c d e; do
> > dd if=/dev/urandom of=zig/"$i" bs=1M count=1
> > done
> > git add .
> > git commit -m 'Add big files'
> > git push -u origin master
> > #>> Writing objects: 100% (8/8), 5.00 MiB | 13.27 MiB/s, done.
> > #^ makes sense: 1 commit + 2 trees (/ and /zig) + 5 files = 8;
> > # 5 MiB in total for the 5x 1 MiB binary files
> >
> > git mv zig zag
> > git commit -m 'Move zig'
> > git push
> > #>> Writing objects: 100% (2/2), 233 bytes | 233.00 KiB/s, done.
> > #^ makes sense: 1 commit + 1 tree (/ renames /zig to /zag) = 2;
> > # a,b,c,d,e objects already in remote
> >
> > git mv zag zog
> > touch zog/f
> > git add zog/f
> > git commit -m 'For great justice'
> > git push
> > #>> Writing objects: 100% (9/9), 5.00 MiB | 24.63 MiB/s, done.
> > #^ It re-uploaded the 5x 1 MiB blobs
> > # even though remote already had them.
> > ```
> >
> > Note that the latter doesn't happen if I use `git -c pack.useSparse=false push`.
>
> I can reproduce this regression on v2.42.0 (self-compiled) on my Debian
> testing system.
>
> Cc'ing Derrick and Junio.
>
> Thanks for the report!
>
> --
> An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara