Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] receive-pack: Add receive.objectCountLimit to refuse push with too many objects

On Sunday 15 May 2011, Shawn Pearce wrote:

On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 06:17, Johan Herland [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I'm planning to add a new capability collection/namespace, called
"limit-*", where the server can communicate capabilities to the
client, like so:

 limit-object-count_100000
 limit-commit-count_1000
 limit-pack-size_500000000

(I'd prefer to s/_/=/ or s/_/:/, but according to pack-protocol.txt, a
capability may not contain "=" or ":")

I forget why = and : are forbidden here. I think its just because we
wanted the options to be "simple". I agree, I would prefer = here too,
and probably would have written the patch that way myself. There
shouldn't be a technical reason why = isn't allowed here. Its just
documented as being not a good idea because at one time someone wrote
that down.

Ok. I'll use '='.

quoted

However, you say:

quoted

For older clients that don't know this new advertised capability, they
should fail hard and not transfer all of this data.

AFAICS this is not the case. If a client does not understand a
capability, it simply ignores it, and carries on doing its usual
thing.

By this I meant #2 below (the initial patch).

Ah, I see. Will use that in the re-roll.

I don't think its as bad as it sounds. Its not a great user
experience, sure. And we maybe should also look at changing the
send-pack code to check the pipe for received data from the remote
peer if pack-objects dies (today it doesn't)... just in case the
reason pack-objects died is because an error message was written and
then the stream was closed.

This will be in the re-roll.


...Johan

-- 
Johan Herland, [off-list ref]
www.herland.net