Re: bug? git push triggers auto pack when gc.auto = 0
- From
- chris <jugg@hotmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 4, 2014, 08:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <loom.20140204T090417-126@post.gmane.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <CACsJy8B0WKfxSYBSgRZQYz6_h+S9pGd03A=rrWM0_twRdKvyZw@mail.gmail.com>
Duy Nguyen <pclouds <at> gmail.com> writes:
Show 17 quoted lines
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:13 PM, chris <jugg <at> hotmail.com> wrote: > > However, I question why I should even care about this message? I'm going to > > assume that simply it is a lengthy synchronous operation that someone felt > > deserved some verbosity to why the client push action is taking longer than > > it should. Yet that makes me question why I'm being penalized for this > > server side operation. My client time should not be consumed for server > > side house keeping. > > > > An obvious fix is to disable gc on the server and implement a cron job for > > the house keeping task. However, as often the case one does not have > > control over the server, so it is unfortunate that git has this server side > > house keeping as a blocking operation to a client action. > > I agree it should not block the client. I think you can Ctrl-C "git > push" at this point without losing anything (data has already been > pushed at this point) but that's not a good advice to general cases. > Maybe we can do something at the server side to not block the client..
I'd like to avoid a Ctrl-C approach, but if an indication existed that assured me the push part of the operation had completed successfully, then that would be sufficient for when I'm impatient.
> Another thing we could do is put "remote: " in front of these strings, > even in ssh case. They seem to confuse you (and me too) that things > happened locally.
Yes, I would like to see more explicit clarity in what messages are coming from the server. That has always been a source of uncertainty for me with any remote git command output.
Thanks for the patches and attention to this issue, I appreciate it.
Chris