On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 02:04:08PM -0500, Justin Tobler wrote:

On 26/06/29 01:58PM, Justin Tobler wrote:

quoted

On 26/06/24 01:26PM, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 11:19:16PM -0500, Justin Tobler wrote:

quoted

@@ -511,11 +511,15 @@ static void odb_transaction_files_prepare(struct odb_transaction *base)
 	 * added at the time they call odb_transaction_files_begin.
 	 */
 	if (!transaction || transaction->objdir)
-		return;
+		return 0;
 
 	transaction->objdir = tmp_objdir_create(base->source->odb->repo, "bulk-fsync");
-	if (transaction->objdir)
-		tmp_objdir_replace_primary_odb(transaction->objdir, 0);
+	if (!transaction->objdir)
+		return -1;

Huh. So previously we just didn't handle this error at all and just
continued to tag along? Did that result in anything sensible or was this
just YOLOing it?

Good question. Previously if there was an error, we wouldn't end up
creating any tmpdir and would instead continue to use the primary ODB to
write objects in. This change would make it a hard error if we fail to
create the temp dir. This matches the behavior that git-receive-pack(1)
expects, but I didn't consider that the existing callers could
transparently handle there being no temp dir.

I suspect we may want existing ODB transaction users to continue being
resilient in the same manner. In the next version, I'll maintain the
same behavior.

I think I got a bit ahead of myself. The existing callers of
odb_transaction_files_prepare() still continue to ignore this error. So
the behavior already does remain the same here.

Oh, well, okay. I think this behaviour is plain bad -- if the caller
wants to have a transaction, then we should bail in case we cannot
create one. But this doesn't need to be fixed in this patch series.

Patrick