From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 646CCC433F5 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 15:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240884AbiBWPlo (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Feb 2022 10:41:44 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52346 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242296AbiBWPlk (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Feb 2022 10:41:40 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-xe29.google.com (mail-vs1-xe29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC76CC0862 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:41:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe29.google.com with SMTP id q9so3627745vsg.2 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:41:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=koordinates.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BIZW5w/Ggqa6XUU95RGlhjfKKidw7VS6bP2bDXUMgFU=; b=3E5vEvnkViG6c1qmsI6CDuPoG39TauQcL+M/SSwmuoq5G5cH8QbrMYpg8JQWJ20x8I HlzvPG6X+2EMeIqNZ994caK0DTd28NwL8D/Sv1Z2JIZXE2NYwcUJJGSbQM2tPnMpwi35 acxMu0s3p0WwtPbUm7Q2XZ4FGFF5dMCg4BsgjdXCTHJqzp3A76ZdeaYcr95+tgOtiT2S ovRdTk+8lOmDvsQs6sI7UcPymRb4+Qmihx7+139HvmbX5f7/oblSiydfaKhVxBXbfs7m Ha9lyqpV4sZR4gUCkWCP0T5yQSWHi0tr9b8AuJSstfMciOi9HI8E8MauTMc6AwgCgXgT DCVA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BIZW5w/Ggqa6XUU95RGlhjfKKidw7VS6bP2bDXUMgFU=; b=uFLUeH81oSbo7bIXAHec6zAbQA+nKBQNgkkIlOUqb07p2XFkznhhB2VcAYKRPanleF HjnaXtiY5kZ5cQd7g4Lbr63AlnMWkb6W9jKxPO/93Pns6d6Vh4L4lGTJVwR+Df8Kw2At jAIDJrStYXDfP0yt4w6OF9zcONKBAT+N4QKkamTm8k10idV/fQJRrxrqDlIqM1xNEq9z yfYH0C1G/TW3FKx7R5IcK02URvimC8Gv/Emz5Xv+FiAaiHGlT/oHSCO7OHXr/R4AGBSC z+uw3RpgAtBsfPRsy0uNHNeSACLW8bOld+1guRkD4tBxAF2YfOpkxpN+OV1/Dy/d+SJi dvpQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530KMrXvNjJpEJJWt2IhA4ZiC5AhKdXFoSi1/wS+OBimA/lrtjI1 lrv1gN5A011B7EEcOhr6CzBo20vFicRIo+0eXgDSBA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwpN9ZrvtxY5KYgvj2FDtTlTOE5WvhLmo1fqyC/gp6mmOxFB3xFIygD/2nio0iJZkbm/8mwo34xuK7VSqq1e8o= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:48e:b0:31c:2105:21e9 with SMTP id n14-20020a056102048e00b0031c210521e9mr143838vsa.32.1645630866958; Wed, 23 Feb 2022 07:41:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Robert Coup Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2022 15:40:50 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] [RFC] repack: add --filter= To: Christian Couder Cc: Taylor Blau , John Cai , John Cai via GitGitGadget , git , Derrick Stolee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Christian, On Tue, 22 Feb 2022 at 17:11, Christian Couder wrote: > > In some cases we just know the objects we are removing are stored by a > promisor remote or are replicated on different physical machines or > both, so you should be fine with this. >From my point of view I think the goal here is great. > > Another option would be to prune the repository according to objects > > that are already made available by a promisor remote. > > If the objects have just been properly transferred to the promisor > remote, the check will just waste resources. As far as I can see this patch doesn't know or check that any of the filtered-out objects are held anywhere else... it simply applies a filter during repacking and the excluded objects are dropped. That's the aspect I have concerns about. Maybe an approach where you build/get/maintain a list of objects-I-definitely-have-elsewhere and pass it as an exclude list to repack would be a cleaner/safer/easier solution? If you're confident enough you don't need to check with the promisor remote then you can use a local list, or even something generated with `rev-list --filter=`. Thanks, Rob :)