From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 15:34:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/16] index-pack: use nr_objects_final as sha1_table size
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1309121132050.20709@syhkavp.arg>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8D=72RsnNKs-6EdUnhu6kurvQ5S2z5PkV3KcY7SUDHJKg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Duy Nguyen wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 10:01 PM, Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net> wrote:
> > However this means that the progress meter will now be wrong and that's
> > terrible !  Users *will* complain that the meter doesn't reach 100% and
> > they'll protest for being denied the remaining objects during the
> > transfer !
> >
> > Joking aside, we should think about doing something about it.  I was
> > wondering if some kind of prefix to the pack stream could be inserted
> > onto the wire when sending a pack v4.  Something like:
> >
> > 'T', 'H', 'I', 'N', <actual_number_of_sent_objects_in_network_order>
> >
> > This 8-byte prefix would simply be discarded by index-pack after being
> > parsed.
> >
> > What do you think?
> 
> I have no problem with this. Although I rather we generalize the case
> to support multiple packs in the same stream (in some case the server
> can just stream away one big existing pack, followed by a smaller pack
> of recent updates), where "thin" is just a special pack that is not
> saved on disk. So except for the signature difference, it should at
> least follow the pack header (sig, version, nr_objects)

Except in this case this is not a separate pack.  This prefix is there 
to provide information that is valid only for the pack to follow and 
therefore cannot be considered as some independent data.


Nicolas