Re: [PATCH RFC 5/5] backfill: report total size of missing blobs in --dry-run
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 30, 2026, 17:17 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqqziabqw8.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <20260930-backfill-dryrun-v1-5-1128f247ee01@gmail.com>
Pablo Sabater <pabloosabaterr@gmail.com> writes:
Show 26 quoted lines
> +
> + if (!ctx->object_info_enabled)
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> + if (!ctx->object_info_transport) {
> + struct promisor_remote *promise =
> + repo_promisor_remote_find(ctx->repo, NULL);
> + struct remote *remote = NULL;
> +
> + if (!promise || !(remote = remote_get(promise->name)))
> + die(_("--dry-run requires a promisor remote"));
> +
> + ctx->object_info_transport = transport_get(remote, NULL);
> +
> + if (!ctx->object_info_transport->smart_options)
> + die(_("failed to get object info: smart options required"));
> + }
> +
> + results->wants_size = 1;
> + status = transport_fetch_object_info(ctx->object_info_transport,
> + &ctx->current_batch,
> + results);
> +
> + if (status == FETCH_OBJECT_INFO_NOT_ENABLED ||
> + !results->sizes) {
> + ctx->object_info_enabled = 0;Yuck.
Because we cannot tell if they allow you to look at the information, this cannot be helped, but it means anybody that looks at this ctx->object_info_enabled member to decide what to do must be careful.
Is it guaranteed that results.sizes[] have been populated as long as status is not FETCH_OBJECT_INFO_NOT_ENABLED? Can there be other errors that makes result.sizes[] unusable? If that is the case, then it would be cleaner to have a dedicated ctx->sizes_valid member rather than relying on ctx->object_info_enabled member to carry this information ...
Show 20 quoted lines
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
> +
> + for (size_t i = 0; i < results->nr; i++)
> + ctx->total_batch_size += results->sizes[i];
> +
> +cleanup:
> + free_fetch_object_info_results(&ctx->object_info_results);
> oid_array_clear(&ctx->current_batch);
> }
>
> @@ -157,12 +201,25 @@ static int do_backfill(struct backfill_context *ctx)
>
> dry_run_batch(ctx);
>
> - printf(Q_("After backfill, %" PRIuMAX " blob would be fetched.\n",
> - "After backfill, %" PRIuMAX " blobs would be fetched.\n",
> - (unsigned long)ctx->total_batch_nr),
> - (uintmax_t)ctx->total_batch_nr);
> + if (ctx->object_info_enabled && ctx->total_batch_nr) {... and use it here. Within the design presented in this series, we know we have asked the other end at this point, and the above function may have turned ctx->object_info member off if the information is not there, so this may be safe. But as I said, I am not sure what happens when fetch-object-info returned other kind of errors.