All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cache-tree: do not lazy-fetch merge tree
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 21:37:06 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <69f2b069-3e11-4a2e-9b81-bde18c463d8c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190903194247.217964-1-jonathantanmy@google.com>

On 9/3/2019 3:42 PM, Jonathan Tan wrote:
> When cherry-picking (for example), new trees may be constructed. During
> this process, Git checks whether these trees exist. However, in a
> partial clone, this causes a lazy fetch to occur, which is both
> unnecessary (because Git has already constructed this tree as part of
> the cherry-picking process) and likely to fail (because the remote
> probably doesn't have this tree).

If we have constructed the object already, then why do we not see it
and avoid fetching it? This must be a slightly strange timing issue
with objects being flushed to disk or added to the object cache.

One approach is to find all of these has_object_file() calls that should
really be one with OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT. Another would be to
find out why has_object_file() isn't seeing the object we constructed.

> Do not lazy fetch in this situation.
I agree that the patch has this effect.
 
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
> ---
> Another partial clone bug.
> 
> This raises the issue that failed fetches are currently fatal - if they
> weren't fatal, this cherry-pick would have worked (except with some
> delay as the fetch is attempted, and with a warning message about the
> fetch failing). My personal inclination right now is to leave things as
> it is (fatal failed fetches), but I'm open to other opinions.
> ---
>  cache-tree.c             |  2 +-
>  t/t0410-partial-clone.sh | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c
> index c22161f987..9e596893bc 100644
> --- a/cache-tree.c
> +++ b/cache-tree.c
> @@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ static int update_one(struct cache_tree *it,
>  	if (repair) {
>  		struct object_id oid;
>  		hash_object_file(buffer.buf, buffer.len, tree_type, &oid);
> -		if (has_object_file(&oid))
> +		if (has_object_file_with_flags(&oid, OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT))
>  			oidcpy(&it->oid, &oid);
>  		else
>  			to_invalidate = 1;
> diff --git a/t/t0410-partial-clone.sh b/t/t0410-partial-clone.sh
> index 6415063980..3e434b6a81 100755
> --- a/t/t0410-partial-clone.sh
> +++ b/t/t0410-partial-clone.sh
> @@ -492,6 +492,20 @@ test_expect_success 'gc stops traversal when a missing but promised object is re
>  	! grep "$TREE_HASH" out
>  '
>  
> +test_expect_success 'do not fetch when checking existence of tree we construct ourselves' '
> +	rm -rf repo &&
> +	test_create_repo repo &&
> +	test_commit -C repo base &&
> +	test_commit -C repo side1 &&
> +	git -C repo checkout base &&
> +	test_commit -C repo side2 &&
> +
> +	git -C repo config core.repositoryformatversion 1 &&
> +	git -C repo config extensions.partialclone "arbitrary string" &&
> +
> +	git -C repo cherry-pick side1
> +'
> +

I appreciate this test!

Thanks,
-Stolee

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-04  1:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-03 19:42 [PATCH] cache-tree: do not lazy-fetch merge tree Jonathan Tan
2019-09-04  1:37 ` Derrick Stolee [this message]
2019-09-04 22:35   ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-04 23:35     ` Junio C Hamano
2019-09-09 19:01 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Tan
2019-09-09 19:55   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-09-09 21:05     ` Junio C Hamano
2019-09-09 22:21       ` Jeff King
2019-09-10  1:09         ` Junio C Hamano
2019-09-10 18:15       ` Jonathan Tan
2019-09-10 12:49   ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-09-10 18:19     ` Jonathan Tan

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=69f2b069-3e11-4a2e-9b81-bde18c463d8c@gmail.com \
    --to=stolee@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathantanmy@google.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.