Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] index-pack: add --unpack-limit to unpack objects
From: Duy Nguyen <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:58:40
On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:46:01AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:quoted
--- I had something that could unpack without writing to temp pack file but I scraped it and chose this way because it follows closely how index-pack works. It's a good thing imo because .pack v4 is coming and I don't know how v4 may impact this unpack code path. Once things are settled, we can revisit and open a separate code path if it's still a good idea.From a cursory read, this seems fine. If it were done in complete isolation, I'd say it was a slight regression, just because we are doing more I/O for the unpack case, and it is not really saving us any code (it is not like we can throw away unpack-objects, as I think we would want to keep it as a last resort for getting data out of malformed or otherwise non-indexable packs).
I can see unpack-objects is more tolerable on corrupt/incomplete packs. If index-pack finds something wrong, it aborts the whole process. I think we can make index-pack stop at the first bad object, adjust nr_objects, and try to recover as much as possible out of the good part. Any other reasons to keep unpack-objects (because I still want to kill it)?
But I can also see it making pack v4 handling easier. So it would make sense to me to put it at the start of a series adding pack v4 indexing. By the end of the series you would be able to see the benefits of the reduced code complexity. Until then, it is a "probably this will help later" change.
Agreed. -- Duy