Re: [PATCH v3 04/11] reftable/stack: verify that `reftable_stack_add()` uses auto-compaction
- From
Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
- Date
- Dec 12, 2023, 03:44 UTC
- Message-ID
- <ZXfXJaDTdEx8tohk@tanuki>
- In-Reply-To
- <ZXdt17pN68tsmH1H@nand.local>
On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 03:15:19PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
Show 51 quoted lines
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 10:07:42AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > While we have several tests that check whether we correctly perform
> > auto-compaction when manually calling `reftable_stack_auto_compact()`,
> > we don't have any tests that verify whether `reftable_stack_add()` does
> > call it automatically. Add one.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> > ---
> > reftable/stack_test.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/reftable/stack_test.c b/reftable/stack_test.c
> > index 0644c8ad2e..52b4dc3b14 100644
> > --- a/reftable/stack_test.c
> > +++ b/reftable/stack_test.c
> > @@ -850,6 +850,54 @@ static void test_reftable_stack_auto_compaction(void)
> > clear_dir(dir);
> > }
> >
> > +static void test_reftable_stack_add_performs_auto_compaction(void)
> > +{
> > + struct reftable_write_options cfg = { 0 };
> > + struct reftable_stack *st = NULL;
> > + struct strbuf refname = STRBUF_INIT;
> > + char *dir = get_tmp_dir(__LINE__);
> > + int err, i, n = 20;
> > +
> > + err = reftable_new_stack(&st, dir, cfg);
> > + EXPECT_ERR(err);
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i <= n; i++) {
> > + struct reftable_ref_record ref = {
> > + .update_index = reftable_stack_next_update_index(st),
> > + .value_type = REFTABLE_REF_SYMREF,
> > + .value.symref = "master",
> > + };
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Disable auto-compaction for all but the last runs. Like this
> > + * we can ensure that we indeed honor this setting and have
> > + * better control over when exactly auto compaction runs.
> > + */
> > + st->disable_auto_compact = i != n;
> > +
> > + strbuf_reset(&refname);
> > + strbuf_addf(&refname, "branch-%04d", i);
> > + ref.refname = refname.buf;
>
> Does the reftable backend take ownership of the "refname" field? If so,
> then I think we'd want to use strbuf_detach() here to avoid a
> double-free() when you call strbuf_release() below.No it doesn't. `reftable_stack_add()` will lock the stack and commit the new table immediately, so there's no need to transfer ownership of memory here.
Patrick