All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@gentoo.org>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Performance issue: initial git clone causes massive repack
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2009 15:57:14 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090405195714.GA4716@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090404220743.GA869@curie-int>

On Sat, Apr 04, 2009 at 03:07:43PM -0700, Robin H. Johnson wrote:

> During an initial clone, I see that git-upload-pack invokes
> pack-objects, despite the ENTIRE repository already being packed - no
> loose objects whatsoever. git-upload-pack then seems to buffer in
> memory.

We need to run pack-objects even if the repo is fully packed because we
don't know what's _in_ the existing pack (or packs). In particular we
want to:

  - combine multiple packs into a single pack; this is more efficient on
    the network, because you can find more deltas, and I believe is
    required because the protocol sends only a single pack.

  - cull any objects which are not actually part of the reachability
    chain from the refs we are sending

If no work needs to be done for either case, then pack-objects should
basically just figure that out and then send the existing pack (the
expensive bit is doing deltas, and we don't consider objects in the same
pack for deltas, as we know we have already considered that during the
last repack). It does mmap the whole pack, so you will see your virtual
memory jump, but nothing should require the whole pack being in memory
at once.

pack-objects streams the output to upload-pack, which should only ever
have an 8K buffer of it in memory at any given time.

At least that is how it is all supposed to work, according to my
understanding. So if you are seeing very high memory usage, I wonder if
there is a bug in pack-objects or upload-pack that can be fixed.

Maybe somebody more knowledgeable than me about packing can comment.

> During 'remote: Counting objects: 4886949, done.', git-upload-pack peaks at
> 2474216KB VSZ and 1143048KB RSS. 
> Shortly thereafter, we get 'remote: Compressing objects:   0%
> (1328/1994284)', git-pack-objects with ~2.8GB VSZ and ~1.8GB RSS. Here,
> the CPU burn also starts. On our test server machine (w/ git 1.6.0.6),
> it takes about 200 minutes walltime to finish the pack, IFF the OOM
> doesn't kick in.

Have you tried with a more recent git to see if it is any better? There
have been a number of changes since 1.6.0.6, although it looks like
mostly dealing with better recovery from corrupted packs.

> Given that the repo is entirely packed already, I see no point in doing
> this.
> 
> For the initial clone, can the git-upload-pack algorithm please send
> existing packs, and only generate a pack containing the non-packed
> items?

I believe that would require a change to the protocol to allow multiple
packs. However, it may be possible to munge the pack header in such a
way that you basically concatenate multiple packs. You would still want
to peek in the big pack to try deltas from the non-packed items, though.

I think all of this falls into the realm of the GSOC pack caching project.
There have been other discussions on the list, so you might want to look
through those for something useful.

-Peff

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-04-05 19:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 97+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-04-04 22:07 Performance issue: initial git clone causes massive repack Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-05  0:05 ` Nicolas Sebrecht
2009-04-05  0:37   ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-05  3:54     ` Nicolas Sebrecht
2009-04-05  4:08       ` Nicolas Sebrecht
2009-04-05  7:04       ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-05 19:02         ` Nicolas Sebrecht
2009-04-05 19:17           ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-05 23:02             ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-05 20:43           ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-05 21:08             ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-05 21:28           ` david
2009-04-05 21:36             ` Sverre Rabbelier
2009-04-06  3:24               ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-07  8:10                 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-07  9:45                   ` Jakub Narebski
2009-04-07 13:13                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-07 13:37                       ` Jakub Narebski
2009-04-07 14:03                         ` Jon Smirl
2009-04-07 17:59                         ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-07 14:21                       ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-07 17:48                         ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-07 18:12                           ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-07 18:56                             ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-07 20:27                               ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-08  4:52                                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-10 20:38                                   ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-11  1:58                                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-11  7:06                                       ` Mike Hommey
2009-04-14 15:52                                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-04-14 20:17                                       ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-14 20:27                                         ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-14 21:02                                           ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-15  3:09                                           ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2009-04-15  5:53                                             ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-15  5:54                                             ` Junio C Hamano
2009-04-15 11:51                                               ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-22  1:15                                           ` Sam Vilain
2009-04-22  9:55                                             ` Mike Ralphson
2009-04-22 11:24                                               ` Pieter de Bie
2009-04-22 13:19                                               ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-04-22 14:35                                                 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-22 16:40                                                   ` Andreas Ericsson
2009-04-22 17:06                                                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-04-23 19:30                                               ` Christian Couder
2009-04-22 14:14                                             ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-22 22:01                                               ` Sam Vilain
2009-04-22 22:50                                                 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-22 23:07                                                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-22 23:30                                                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-04-23  3:16                                                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-14 20:30                                         ` Johannes Schindelin
2009-04-07 20:29                             ` Jeff King
2009-04-07 20:35                               ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-08 11:28                       ` [PATCH] process_{tree,blob}: Remove useless xstrdup calls Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-10 22:20                         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11  0:27                           ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11  1:15                             ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11  1:34                               ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-11 13:41                               ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-11 14:07                                 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-11 18:06                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11 18:22                                     ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11 19:22                                       ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-11 20:50                                     ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-11 21:43                                       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11 23:24                                         ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-11 18:19                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-11 19:40                                     ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-04-11 19:58                                       ` Linus Torvalds
2009-04-05 22:59             ` Performance issue: initial git clone causes massive repack Nicolas Sebrecht
2009-04-05 23:20               ` david
2009-04-05 23:28                 ` Robin Rosenberg
2009-04-06  3:34                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06  5:15                   ` Junio C Hamano
2009-04-06 13:12                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06 13:52                     ` Jon Smirl
2009-04-06 14:19                       ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06 14:37                         ` Jon Smirl
2009-04-06 14:48                           ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-04-06 15:14                           ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06 15:28                             ` Jon Smirl
2009-04-06 16:14                               ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06 11:22                   ` Matthieu Moy
2009-04-06 13:29                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06 14:03                       ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-06 14:14                         ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-07 10:11               ` Martin Langhoff
2009-04-05 19:57 ` Jeff King [this message]
2009-04-05 23:38   ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-05 23:42     ` Robin H. Johnson
     [not found]     ` <0015174c150e49b5740466d7d2c2@google.com>
2009-04-06  0:29       ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-06  3:10     ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2009-04-06  4:09       ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06  4:06     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-04-06 14:20       ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-04-11 17:24 ` Mark Levedahl

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090405195714.GA4716@coredump.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robbat2@gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.