| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
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
|
|
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 <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
* jk/repack-pack-writebitmaps-config:
t7700: drop explicit --no-pack-kept-objects from .keep test
repack: introduce repack.writeBitmaps config option
repack: simplify handling of --write-bitmap-index
pack-objects: stop respecting pack.writebitmaps
|
|
We currently have pack.writeBitmaps, which originally
operated at the pack-objects level. This should really have
been a repack.* option from day one. Let's give it the more
sensible name, but keep the old version as a deprecated
synonym.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
When pack-objects is computing the reachability bitmap to
serve a fetch request, it can erroneously die() if some of
the UNINTERESTING objects are not present. Upload-pack
throws away HAVE lines from the client for objects we do not
have, but we may have a tip object without all of its
ancestors (e.g., if the tip is no longer reachable and was
new enough to survive a `git prune`, but some of its
reachable objects did get pruned).
In the non-bitmap case, we do a revision walk with the HAVE
objects marked as UNINTERESTING. The revision walker
explicitly ignores errors in accessing UNINTERESTING commits
to handle this case (and we do not bother looking at
UNINTERESTING trees or blobs at all).
When we have bitmaps, however, the process is quite
different. The bitmap index for a pack-objects run is
calculated in two separate steps:
First, we perform an extensive walk from all the HAVEs to
find the full set of objects reachable from them. This walk
is usually optimized away because we are expected to hit an
object with a bitmap during the traversal, which allows us
to terminate early.
Secondly, we perform an extensive walk from all the WANTs,
which usually also terminates early because we hit a commit
with an existing bitmap.
Once we have the resulting bitmaps from the two walks, we
AND-NOT them together to obtain the resulting set of objects
we need to pack.
When we are walking the HAVE objects, the revision walker
does not know that we are walking it only to mark the
results as uninteresting. We strip out the UNINTERESTING flag,
because those objects _are_ interesting to us during the
first walk. We want to keep going to get a complete set of
reachable objects if we can.
We need some way to tell the revision walker that it's OK to
silently truncate the HAVE walk, just like it does for the
UNINTERESTING case. This patch introduces a new
`ignore_missing_links` flag to the `rev_info` struct, which
we set only for the HAVE walk.
It also adds tests to cover UNINTERESTING objects missing
from several positions: a missing blob, a missing tree, and
a missing parent commit. The missing blob already worked (as
we do not care about its contents at all), but the other two
cases caused us to die().
Note that there are a few cases we do not need to test:
1. We do not need to test a missing tree, with the blob
still present. Without the tree that refers to it, we
would not know that the blob is relevant to our walk.
2. We do not need to test a tip commit that is missing.
Upload-pack omits these for us (and in fact, we
complain even in the non-bitmap case if it fails to do
so).
Reported-by: Siddharth Agarwal <sid0@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <tanoku@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
The pack bitmap format requires that we have a single bit
for each object in the pack, and that each object's bitmap
represents its complete set of reachable objects. Therefore
we have no way to represent the bitmap of an object which
references objects outside the pack.
We notice this problem while generating the bitmaps, as we
try to find the offset of a particular object and realize
that we do not have it. In this case we die, and neither the
bitmap nor the pack is generated. This is correct, but
perhaps a little unfriendly. If you have bitmaps turned on
in the config, many repacks will fail which would otherwise
succeed. E.g., incremental repacks, repacks with "-l" when
you have alternates, ".keep" files.
Instead, this patch notices early that we are omitting some
objects from the pack and turns off bitmaps (with a
warning). Note that this is not strictly correct, as it's
possible that the object being omitted is not reachable from
any other object in the pack. In practice, this is almost
never the case, and there are two advantages to doing it
this way:
1. The code is much simpler, as we do not have to cleanly
abort the bitmap-generation process midway through.
2. We do not waste time partially generating bitmaps only
to find out that some object deep in the history is not
being packed.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
When we use pack bitmaps rather than walking the object
graph, we end up with the list of objects to include in the
packfile, but we do not know the path at which any tree or
blob objects would be found.
In a recently packed repository, this is fine. A fetch would
use the paths only as a heuristic in the delta compression
phase, and a fully packed repository should not need to do
much delta compression.
As time passes, though, we may acquire more objects on top
of our large bitmapped pack. If clients fetch frequently,
then they never even look at the bitmapped history, and all
works as usual. However, a client who has not fetched since
the last bitmap repack will have "have" tips in the
bitmapped history, but "want" newer objects.
The bitmaps themselves degrade gracefully in this
circumstance. We manually walk the more recent bits of
history, and then use bitmaps when we hit them.
But we would also like to perform delta compression between
the newer objects and the bitmapped objects (both to delta
against what we know the user already has, but also between
"new" and "old" objects that the user is fetching). The lack
of pathnames makes our delta heuristics much less effective.
This patch adds an optional cache of the 32-bit name_hash
values to the end of the bitmap file. If present, a reader
can use it to match bitmapped and non-bitmapped names during
delta compression.
Here are perf results for p5310:
Test origin/master HEAD^ HEAD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5310.2: repack to disk 36.81(37.82+1.43) 47.70(48.74+1.41) +29.6% 47.75(48.70+1.51) +29.7%
5310.3: simulated clone 30.78(29.70+2.14) 1.08(0.97+0.10) -96.5% 1.07(0.94+0.12) -96.5%
5310.4: simulated fetch 3.16(6.10+0.08) 3.54(10.65+0.06) +12.0% 1.70(3.07+0.06) -46.2%
5310.6: partial bitmap 36.76(43.19+1.81) 6.71(11.25+0.76) -81.7% 4.08(6.26+0.46) -88.9%
You can see that the time spent on an incremental fetch goes
down, as our delta heuristics are able to do their work.
And we save time on the partial bitmap clone for the same
reason.
Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <tanoku@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
|
Now that we can read and write bitmaps, we can exercise them
with some basic functionality tests. These tests aren't
particularly useful for seeing the benefit, as the test
repo is too small for it to make a difference. However, we
can at least check that using bitmaps does not break anything.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
|
Junio C Hamano
Jeff King
Vicent Marti