From: Nicolas Pitre Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:19:41 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] change the unpack limit threshold to a saner value Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vejrcy860.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Nicolas Pitre writes: > > > Let's assume the average object size is x. Given n objects, the needed > > storage size is n*(x + b), where b is the average wasted block size on > > disk. > > ... > > This is why I think the current default treshold should be 3 instead of > > the insane value of 5000. But since it feels a bit odd to go from 5000 > > to 3 I setled on 10. > > I see you are optimizing for disk footprint, and this will > result in tons of tiny packs left between "repack -a". Depends how often i.e. how big pushes are, and how often you repack. > I have not benched it yet, but the runtime pack handling code > was written assuming we have only a handful of big packs; I > suspect this change would affect the performance at runtime in > quite a bad way. Possibly. Still a treshold of 5000 is way too large IMHO.