git/builtin/pack-objects.c, branch v2.4.2

Merge branch 'rs/deflate-init-cleanup'

2015-03-17T23:01:26Z

Code simplification. * rs/deflate-init-cleanup: zlib: initialize git_zstream in git_deflate_init{,_gzip,_raw}

zlib: initialize git_zstream in git_deflate_init{,_gzip,_raw}

2015-03-05T23:46:03Z

Clear the git_zstream variable at the start of git_deflate_init() etc. so that callers don't have to do that. Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

pack-objects: use --objects-edge-aggressive for shallow repos

2014-12-29T17:58:25Z

When fetching into or pushing from a shallow repository, we want to aggressively mark edges as uninteresting, since this decreases the pack size. However, aggressively marking edges can negatively affect performance on large non-shallow repositories with lots of refs. Teach pack-objects a --shallow option to indicate that we're pushing from or fetching into a shallow repository. Use --objects-edge-aggressive only for shallow repositories and otherwise use --objects-edge, which performs better in the general case. Update the callers to pass the --shallow option when they are dealing with a shallow repository. Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

rev-list: add an option to mark fewer edges as uninteresting

2014-12-29T17:57:55Z

In commit fbd4a70 (list-objects: mark more commits as edges in mark_edges_uninteresting - 2013-08-16), we marked an increasing number of edges uninteresting. This change, and the subsequent change to make this conditional on --objects-edge, are used by --thin to make much smaller packs for shallow clones. Unfortunately, they cause a significant performance regression when pushing non-shallow clones with lots of refs (23.322 seconds vs. 4.785 seconds with 22400 refs). Add an option to git rev-list, --objects-edge-aggressive, that preserves this more aggressive behavior, while leaving --objects-edge to provide more performant behavior. Preserve the current behavior for the moment by using the aggressive option. Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

Merge branch 'jk/prune-mtime'

2014-10-29T17:07:56Z

Tighten the logic to decide that an unreachable cruft is sufficiently old by covering corner cases such as an ancient object becoming reachable and then going unreachable again, in which case its retention period should be prolonged. * jk/prune-mtime: (28 commits) drop add_object_array_with_mode revision: remove definition of unused 'add_object' function pack-objects: double-check options before discarding objects repack: pack objects mentioned by the index pack-objects: use argv_array reachable: use revision machinery's --indexed-objects code rev-list: add --indexed-objects option rev-list: document --reflog option t5516: test pushing a tag of an otherwise unreferenced blob traverse_commit_list: support pending blobs/trees with paths make add_object_array_with_context interface more sane write_sha1_file: freshen existing objects pack-objects: match prune logic for discarding objects pack-objects: refactor unpack-unreachable expiration check prune: keep objects reachable from recent objects sha1_file: add for_each iterators for loose and packed objects count-objects: use for_each_loose_file_in_objdir count-objects: do not use xsize_t when counting object size prune-packed: use for_each_loose_file_in_objdir reachable: mark index blobs as SEEN ...

Merge branch 'eb/no-pthreads'

2014-10-24T21:59:10Z

Allow us build with NO_PTHREADS=NoThanks compilation option. * eb/no-pthreads: Handle atexit list internaly for unthreaded builds pack-objects: set number of threads before checking and warning index-pack: fix compilation with NO_PTHREADS

Merge branch 'jk/pack-objects-no-bitmap-when-splitting'

2014-10-24T21:56:10Z

Splitting pack-objects output into multiple packs is incompatible with the use of reachability bitmap. * jk/pack-objects-no-bitmap-when-splitting: pack-objects: turn off bitmaps when we split packs

pack-objects: turn off bitmaps when we split packs

2014-10-19T22:08:38Z

If a pack.packSizeLimit is set, we may split the pack data across multiple packfiles. This means we cannot generate .bitmap files, as they require that all of the reachable objects are in the same pack. We check that condition when we are generating the list of objects to pack (and disable bitmaps if we are not packing everything), but we forgot to update it when we notice that we needed to split (which doesn't happen until the actual write phase). The resulting bitmaps are quite bogus (they mention entries that do not exist in the pack!) and can cause a fetch or push to send insufficient objects. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

pack-objects: double-check options before discarding objects

2014-10-19T22:07:07Z

When we are given an expiration time like --unpack-unreachable=2.weeks.ago, we avoid writing out old, unreachable loose objects entirely, under the assumption that running "prune" would simply delete them immediately anyway. However, this is only valid if we computed the same set of reachable objects as prune would. In practice, this is the case, because only git-repack uses the --unpack-unreachable option with an expiration, and it always feeds as many objects into the pack as possible. But we can double-check at runtime just to be sure. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

repack: pack objects mentioned by the index

2014-10-19T22:07:07Z

When we pack all objects, we use only the objects reachable from references and reflogs. This misses any objects which are reachable from the index, but not yet referenced. By itself this isn't a big deal; the objects can remain loose until they are actually used in a commit. However, it does create a problem when we drop packed but unreachable objects. We try to optimize out the writing of objects that we will immediately prune, which means we must follow the same rules as prune in determining what is reachable. And prune uses the index for this purpose. This is rather uncommon in practice, as objects in the index would not usually have been packed in the first place. But it could happen in a sequence like: 1. You make a commit on a branch that references blob X. 2. You repack, moving X into the pack. 3. You delete the branch (and its reflog), so that X is unreferenced. 4. You "git add" blob X so that it is now referenced only by the index. 5. You repack again with git-gc. The pack-objects we invoke will see that X is neither referenced nor recent and not bother loosening it. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano