> On Jun 13, 2019, at 11:43 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:33:40AM -0600, Nasser Grainawi wrote:
>
>> I have a situation where I need to delete 100k+ refs on 15+ separate
>> hosts/disks. This setup is using Gerrit replication, so I can trigger
>
I have a situation where I need to delete 100k+ refs on 15+ separate
hosts/disks. This setup is using Gerrit replication, so I can trigger it all on
one host and it will push the deletes to the rest (all running git-daemon
v2.18.0 with receive-pack enabled). All the refs being deleted on the rec
On Jun 12, 2016, at 4:13 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>
>At GitHub we actually have a patch to `repack` that keeps all
>objects, reachable or not, in the pack, and use it for all of our
>automated maintenance. Since we don't drop objects at all, we can't
>ever have such a race. Aside from
> On Dec 9, 2015, at 9:19 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 05:34:43PM +, Daniel Koverman wrote:
>
>> It is also good to know that 2000 remote refs is insane. The lower
>> hanging fruit here sounds like trimming that to a reasonable
>> number, so I'll try that approach first.
On Mar 24, 2014, at 4:54 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 03:18:14PM -0400, Scott Sandler wrote:
>
>> I've noticed that a few times in the past several weeks, we've had
>> events where pushes have been lost when two people pushed at just
>> about the same time. The scenario is that
On Feb 28, 2014, at 1:55 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:04:44AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> I wonder if it makes sense to link it with "pack.writebitmaps" more
>> tightly, without even exposing it as a seemingly orthogonal knob
>> that can be tweaked, though.
>>
>> I th
On Oct 23, 2013, at 8:07 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Duy Nguyen writes:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
It would be just the matter of updating commit_tree_extended() in
commit.c to:
- de
7 matches
Mail list logo
