This reverts commit 0e549137966feb016927a827fb6e359aec8264a3 so to return
to the same state as commit b5d72f0a4cd3cce945ca0d37e4fa0ebbfcdcdb52.
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> During my testing with a 40,000 loose object case (yea, I fully
> unpacked a git.git clone I had laying around) my system stalled
> hard in the first object directory. A *lot* longer than 1 second.
> So I got no progress meter for a long time, and then a progress
> meter appeared on the second directory.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since it is now OK to pass a null pointer to display_progress() and
stop_progress() resulting in a no-op, then we can simplify the code
and remove a bunch of lines by not making those calls conditional all
the time.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This allows for better management of progress "object" existence,
as well as making the progress display implementation more independent
from its callers.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The progress count is per fanout directory, so it is useless to call
it for every file as the count doesn't change that often.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Rather than reimplementing the progress meter logic and always
showing 100 lines of output while pruning already packed objects
we now use a delayed progress meter and only show it if there are
enough objects to make us take a little while.
Most users won't see the message anymore as it usually doesn't take
very long to delete the already packed loose objects. This neatens
the output of a git-gc or git-repack execution, which is especially
important for a `git gc --auto` triggered from within another
command.
We perform the display_progress() call from within the very innermost
loop in case we spend more than 1 second within any single object
directory. This ensures that a progress_update event from the
timer will still trigger in a timely fashion and allow the user to
see the progress meter.
While I'm in here I changed the message to be more descriptive of
its actual task. "Removing unused objects" is a little scary for
new users as they wonder where these unused objects came from and
how they should avoid them. Truth is these objects aren't unused
in the sense of what git-prune would call a dangling object, these
are used but are just duplicates of things we have already stored
in a packfile.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Steven Grimm noticed that git-repack's verbosity is inconsistent
because pack-objects is chatty and prune-packed is not. This
makes the latter a bit more chatty and gives -q option to
squelch it.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The dryrun variable was made local instead of static by the previous
commit, and local variables aren't initialized to zero.
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Julliard <julliard@winehq.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Both the git-prune manpage and everday.txt say that git-prune should also prune
unpacked objects that are also found in packs, by running git prune-packed.
Junio thought this was "a regression when prune was rewritten as a built-in."
So modify prune to call prune-packed again.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
Incremental repack without -a essentially boils down to:
rev-list --objects --unpacked --all |
pack-objects $new_pack
which picks up all loose objects that are still live and creates
a new pack.
This implements --unpacked=<existing pack> option to tell the
revision walking machinery to pretend as if objects in such a
pack are unpacked for the purpose of object listing. With this,
we could say:
rev-list --objects --unpacked=$active_pack --all |
pack-objects $new_pack
instead, to mean "all live loose objects but pretend as if
objects that are in this pack are also unpacked". The newly
created pack would be perfect for updating $active_pack by
replacing it.
Since pack-objects now knows how to do the rev-list's work
itself internally, you can also write the above example by:
pack-objects --unpacked=$active_pack --all $new_pack </dev/null
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
