On Wed, 5 Sep 2007 11:47:45 -0500, "Govind Salinas" wrote:I'll throw my opinion in here as well. I think git should automatically do repacking by default, (once loose objects exceed some threshold). There have several posts in this thread from people who don't want auto-gc, but these same people should be able to avoid it, and likely without changing habits. That's because: * They're already in the habit of manually repacking every once in a while, (or like, Linus, much more often than strictly necessary). * They've already got cron jobs setup to do the repacking. And one could augment this with an option to disable the repacking of course. And if you're really concerned about people that don't want this getting it anyway, just determine some useful threshold and then double it or so before it triggers automatic repacking, (so the automatic repacking hits only us idiots that completely neglect it). [Pardon me for continuing to quote in the original top-posted order, but I like the flow here.] On 9/5/07, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: I know it was surprising to you, Linus, but I'm glad you noticed it. I've seen the same thing from many users. And git actually discourages users from learning about repacking. If the user starts with a small (or new) project, then everything performs well, and there's no performance problem whatsoever. So then the problems creep up gradually, and the user has no idea that he should be doing anything different than he's always done. Instead the user is left to just conclude that git's performance isn't scaling well as the project grows. That's a bad conclusion of course, and it's bad that git sets things up so the user reaches that conclusion. Instead, git should just fix things up itself in this case. I don't think the warning message alone is a good fix. I think the people who would understand the warning and appreciate that they could then take care of repacking as convenient are the same people that already understand the repacking concept, and are likely already repacking occasionally, (so would likely never see the warning). But the problematic case is the user who knows nothing of the issue. And in that case, giving this warning isn't useful education, it's just forcing the user to learn more and do more work. "If git notices it has too many 'loose object' and 'git gc' would fix the problem, then why didn't it do that itself? And what the heck is a 'loose object' anyway?" In general, git has always printed too many obscure messages that don't actually help a new user get his work done, (and the work is _not_ to learn more about git internals). From 1.4 to 1.5 much of that was improved. But please let's not go backwards by adding more of these. So one vote from me for auto repacking, (but feel free to make the threshold so high that anyone that actually _cares_ about loose objects and repacking will never get the auto repack). -Carl
| Nick Piggin | Re: [Announce] [patch] Modular Scheduler Core and Completely Fair Scheduler [CFS] |
| Greg KH | Linux 2.6.26.3 |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Greg KH | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
git: | |
| David Symonds | Re: git and binary files |
| Sam Song | Fwd: [OT] Re: Git via a proxy server? |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [PATCH 0/6] Initial subproject support (RFC?) |
| Petr Baudis | Re: repo.or.cz wishes? |
| GVG GVG | ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host |
| Jeff Garzik | Re: Wasting our Freedom |
| Alexey Suslikov | OT: OpenBSD on Asus eeePC |
| ropers | Re: Real men don't attack straw men |
| David Howells | [PATCH 6/7] FS-Cache: CacheFiles: ia64: missing copy_page export [try #13] |
| Valdis.Kletnieks | Re: [RFD] Incremental fsck |
| Chris Mason | Re: [PATCH][RFC] fast file mapping for loop |
| Nikolai Joukov | Re: [ANNOUNCE] RAIF: Redundant Array of Independent Filesystems |
