On 9/5/2019 4:37 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > >> Do we want to to have fetch.writeCommitGraph, receive.writeCommitGraph, >> and then a master transfer.writeCommitGraph? > > If anything, it may be good for consistency. > > I am not sure if it is a good idea to trigger writing the commit > graph when accepting a push, though. It tends to be a lot finer > grained than fetching, right?
And I expect a push to include many fewer commits than a fetch. In a server environment, I would expect to have a separate maintenance task responsible for updating the commit-graph after receiving new data, but not in an in-line fashion with the push. Think about the situation of many pushes that happen in a short burst: one write after all of the pushes would have close to the same performance benefits as writing with every push, but does a lot less work. Thanks, -Stolee
