Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] More commit-graph/Bloom filter improvements

> On 6/24/2020 7:11 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> This does not seem to play well with what is in flight.  Tests seem
>> to pass with topics up to es/config-hooks merged but not with this
>> topic merged on top.
>> 
>>     1b5d3d8260 Merge branch 'ds/commit-graph-bloom-updates' into seen
>>     32169c595c Merge branch 'es/config-hooks' into seen
>>     ...
>> 
>> $ sh t4216-log-bloom.sh -i -v
>> 
>> ends like so:
>> 
>> ok 133 - Use Bloom filters if they exist in the latest but not all commit graphs in the chain.
>> 
>> expecting success of 4216.134 'persist filter settings':
>>         test_when_finished rm -rf .git/objects/info/commit-graph* &&
>>         GIT_TRACE2_EVENT="$(pwd)/trace2.txt" git commit-graph write --reachable --changed-paths &&
>>         grep "{\"hash_version\":1,\"num_hashes\":7,\"bits_per_entry\":10}" trace2.txt &&
>>         cp .git/objects/info/commit-graph commit-graph-before &&
>>         corrupt_graph $BASE_K_BYTE_OFFSET "\09" &&
>>         corrupt_graph $BASE_LEN_BYTE_OFFSET "\0F" &&
>>         cp .git/objects/info/commit-graph commit-graph-after &&
>>         test_commit c18 A/corrupt &&
>>         GIT_TRACE2_EVENT="$(pwd)/trace2.txt" git commit-graph write --reachable --changed-paths &&
>>         grep "{\"hash_version\":1,\"num_hashes\":57,\"bits_per_entry\":70}" trace2.txt
>> 
>> not ok 134 - persist filter settings
>> # ...
>> 
>> Thanks.
>
> Thanks for letting me know. I'll investigate carefully with the
> rest of the 'seen' branch. This test is a bit fragile due to
> computed values for which bytes to replace, so anything that
> could have changed the length or order of chunks would lead to
> a failure here.
>
> Sorry for the disruption.