The pack bitmap format requires that we have a single bit
for each object in the pack, and that each object's bitmap
represents its complete set of reachable objects. Therefore
we have no way to represent the bitmap of an object which
references objects outside the pack.
We notice this problem
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 06:38:57PM -0800, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
Running git-next, writing bitmap indexes fails if a keep file is
present from an earlier pack.
Right, that's expected.
The bitmap format cannot represent objects that are not present in the
pack. So we cannot write a bitmap
On 01/23/2014 02:52 PM, Jeff King wrote:
Right, that's expected.
The bitmap format cannot represent objects that are not present in the
pack. So we cannot write a bitmap index if any object reachable from a
packed commit is omitted from the pack.
We could be nicer and downgrade it to a
On 01/23/2014 03:45 PM, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
The worry is less certain objects not being packed and more the old
packs being deleted by git repack, isn't it? From the man page for
git-index-pack:
This should probably be new pack and not old packs, I guess. Not
knowing much about how
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Siddharth Agarwal s...@fb.com wrote:
Yes, we'd prefer to do that too. How do you actually do this, though? I
don't see a way to pass `--honor-pack-keep` (shouldn't I pass in its
inverse?) down to `git-pack-objects`.
We run with this patch in production, it may
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:56:17AM +0100, Vicent Martà wrote:
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:45 AM, Siddharth Agarwal s...@fb.com wrote:
Yes, we'd prefer to do that too. How do you actually do this, though? I
don't see a way to pass `--honor-pack-keep` (shouldn't I pass in its
inverse?) down
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 03:53:28PM -0800, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
On 01/23/2014 03:45 PM, Siddharth Agarwal wrote:
The worry is less certain objects not being packed and more the old
packs being deleted by git repack, isn't it? From the man page for
git-index-pack:
This should probably
On 01/23/2014 06:28 PM, Jeff King wrote:
I think your understanding is accurate here. So we want repack to
respect keep files for deletion, but we _not_ necessarily want
pack-objects to avoid packing an object just because it's in a pack
marked by .keep (see my other email).
Yes, that makes
8 matches
Mail list logo
