Re: v1.5.4 plans

From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Dec 11, 2007, 13:59 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.99999.0712110853350.555@xanadu.home>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.2903301355300.27959@racer.site>

On Fri, 30 Mar 2029, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 23 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > 
> > > There are outstanding issues that need to be resolved:
> > > 
> > >  * We need to do something about "gc --aggressive".  The documentation
> > >    removal patch from Linus, if it ever materializes, would be better
> > >    than nothing, but I have this nagging suspicion that the explosion is
> > >    merely a bad interation between -A and -f option to the repack, which
> > >    are not meant to be used together.
> > 
> > Well, with the gcc repo, simply using 'git repack -a -f' with current 
> > default window size does produce a 2.1GB pack, while changing the window 
> > size to 100 (keeping default delta depth) produces a 400MB pack for me.
> > 
> > So this is really a matter of not having a sufficiently large window for 
> > some data sets.
> 
> So my dumb patch to simply default to window and depth 250 with 
> aggressive was not _that_ dumb after all?

Probably not, although this might be rather wasteful on some repositories. But that's what expectations are for --aggressive.

I wish we could find a way to set some good window default dynamically though. Or perhaps the filename hashing needs improvements.

Nicolas