All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: David Turner <novalis@novalis.org>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "disabling bitmap writing, as some objects are not being packed"?
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 14:08:58 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170208190858.rjoqehbhyizlwg5q@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1486580742.1938.52.camel@novalis.org>

On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 02:05:42PM -0500, David Turner wrote:

> On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 09:44 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
> > 
> > > On second thought, perhaps gc.autoDetach should default to false if
> > > there's no tty, since its main point it to stop breaking interactive
> > > usage. That would make the server side happy (no tty there).
> > 
> > Sounds like an idea, but wouldn't that keep the end-user coming over
> > the network waiting after accepting a push until the GC completes, I
> > wonder.  If an impatient user disconnects, would that end up killing
> > an ongoing GC?  etc.
> 
> Regardless, it's impolite to keep the user waiting. So, I think we
> should just not write the "too many unreachable loose objects" message
> if auto-gc is on.  Does that sound OK?

I thought the point of that message was to prevent auto-gc from kicking
in over and over again due to objects that won't actually get pruned.

I wonder if you'd want to either bump the auto-gc object limit, or
possibly reduce the gc.pruneExpire limit to keep this situation from
coming up in the first place (or at least mitigating the amount of time
it's the case).

-Peff

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-08 19:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-16 21:05 "disabling bitmap writing, as some objects are not being packed"? David Turner
2016-12-16 21:27 ` Jeff King
2016-12-16 21:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-12-16 21:32   ` Jeff King
2016-12-16 21:40     ` David Turner
2016-12-16 21:49       ` Jeff King
2016-12-16 23:59         ` [PATCH] pack-objects: don't warn about bitmaps on incremental pack David Turner
2016-12-17  4:04           ` Jeff King
2016-12-19 16:03             ` David Turner
2016-12-17  7:50   ` "disabling bitmap writing, as some objects are not being packed"? Duy Nguyen
2017-02-08  1:03     ` David Turner
2017-02-08  6:45       ` Duy Nguyen
2017-02-08  8:24         ` David Turner
2017-02-08  8:37           ` Duy Nguyen
2017-02-08 17:44             ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-08 19:05               ` David Turner
2017-02-08 19:08                 ` Jeff King [this message]
2017-02-08 22:14                   ` David Turner
2017-02-08 23:00                     ` Jeff King
2017-02-09  0:18                       ` Junio C Hamano
2017-02-09  1:12                         ` Jeff King

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=20170208190858.rjoqehbhyizlwg5q@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=novalis@novalis.org \
    --cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
    /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.