Re: Antw: Re: non-smooth progress indication for git fsck and git gc
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2018-08-21 01:07:16
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:57:13AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
quoted
That seems to apply. BTW: Is there a way go get some repository statistics like a histogram of object sizes (or whatever that might be useful to help making decisions)?The git-sizer program is really helpful in this regard: https://github.com/github/git-sizer
Yeah, I'd very much agree that's the best tool for a general overview of the repository stats. Ulrich, if you want to more analysis (like a histogram), probably something like: git cat-file --batch-all-objects --batch-check='%(objectsize)' might be a good starting place to dump information (see the "BATCH OUTPUT" section of "git help cat-file" for more format items).
quoted
If it's sorting, maybe add some code like (wild guess): if (objects_to_sort > magic_number) message("Sorting something...");I think a good solution to these cases is to just introduce something to the progress.c mode where it learns how to display a counter where we don't know what the end-state will be. Something like your proposed magic_number can just be covered under the more general case where we don't show the progress bar unless it's been 1 second (which I believe is the default).
Yeah. We already have open-ended counters (e.g., "counting objects"),
and delayed meters (we actually normalized the default to 2s recently).
I _think_ they should work together OK without further modification.
Once upon a time the caller had to say "don't show if we're past N%
after M seconds", but I think with the current code we'd just show it if
we're not completely finished after 2 seconds.
So it really should just be a simple:
progress = start_delayed_progress("Hashing packfile", 0);
That said, counting bytes would probably be ugly (just because the
numbers get really big). We'd probably prefer to show a throughput or
something. And as you noted, there's some refactoring to be done with
pack-check for it to show multiple progress meters.
(I still think in the long run we would want to scrap that code, but
that's a much bigger job; I'm fine if somebody wants to do incremental
improvements in the meantime).
-Peff