Two cleanups around 'prefetch' refs
cover Two cleanups around 'prefetch' refs
Here are a couple things that caught my eye during a recent evaluation of the maintenance feature:
1. 'refs/prefetch/' refs show up in 'git log' decorations. Auto-hide these.
2. t7900-maintenance.sh had some scary warnings that end up being unimportant.
This is based on 'master' at 66e871b (The third batch, 2021-01-15).
Thanks, -Stolee
Derrick Stolee (2):
maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch
t7900: clean up some broken refs
builtin/gc.c | 6 ++++++ t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
base-commit: 66e871b6647ffea61a77a0f82c7ef3415f1ee79c
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-838%2Fderrickstolee%2Fprefetch-refs-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-838/derrickstolee/prefetch-refs-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/838
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
PATCH 1/2 maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch
From: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The 'prefetch' task fetches refs from all remotes and places them in the refs/prefetch/<remote>/ refspace. As this task is intended to run in the background, this allows users to keep their local data very close to the remote servers' data while not updating the users' understanding of the remote refs in refs/remotes/<remote>/.
However, this can clutter 'git log' decorations with copies of the refs with the full name 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/<branch>'.
The log.excludeDecoration config option was added in a6be5e67 (log: add log.excludeDecoration config option, 2020-05-16) for exactly this purpose.
Ensure we set this only for users that would benefit from it by assigning it at the beginning of the prefetch task. Other alternatives would be during 'git maintenance register' or 'git maintenance start', but those might assign the config even when the prefetch task is disabled by existing config. Further, users could run 'git maintenance run --task=prefetch' using their own scripting or scheduling. This provides the best coverage to automatically update the config when valuable.
It is improbable, but possible, that users might want to run the prefetch task _and_ see these refs in their log decorations. This seems incredibly unlikely to me, but users can always opt-in on a command-by-command basis using --decorate-refs=refs/prefetch/.
Test that this works in a few cases. In particular, ensure that our assignment of log.excludeDecoration=refs/prefetch/ is additive to other existing exclusions. Further, ensure we do not add multiple copies in multiple runs.
--- builtin/gc.c | 6 ++++++ t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
builtin/gc.c +6 -0
@@ -897,6 +897,12 @@ static int maintenance_task_prefetch(struct maintenance_run_opts *opts)struct string_list_item *item;struct string_list remotes =STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP ; +git_config_set_multivar_gently ("log.excludedecoration" , +"refs/prefetch/" , +"refs/prefetch/" , +CONFIG_FLAGS_FIXED_VALUE | +CONFIG_FLAGS_MULTI_REPLACE ); +if (for_each_remote (append_remote, &remotes)) {error (_ ("failed to fill remotes" )); result =1 ;
t/t7900-maintenance.sh +25 -1
@@ -149,7 +149,31 @@ test_expect_success 'prefetch multiple remotes' ' git log prefetch/remote2/two && git fetch --all && test_cmp_rev refs/remotes/remote1/one refs/prefetch/remote1/one && - test_cmp_rev refs/remotes/remote2/two refs/prefetch/remote2/two + test_cmp_rev refs/remotes/remote2/two refs/prefetch/remote2/two && + + test_cmp_config refs/prefetch/ log.excludedecoration && + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log && + ! grep "prefetch" log +' + +test_expect_success 'prefetch and existing log.excludeDecoration values' ' + git config --unset-all log.excludeDecoration && + git config log.excludeDecoration refs/remotes/remote1/ && + git maintenance run --task=prefetch && + + git config --get-all log.excludeDecoration >out && + grep refs/remotes/remote1/ out && + grep refs/prefetch/ out && + + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log && + ! grep "prefetch" log && + ! grep "remote1" log && + grep "remote2" log && + + # a second run does not change the config + git maintenance run --task=prefetch && + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log2 && + test_cmp log log2 ' test_expect_success 'loose-objects task' '
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Re: [PATCH 1/2] maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch
Not related to the patch below, but in the subject line: s/durin/\0g/.
Quoted 5 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
builtin/gc.c +0
-0
builtin/gc.c static int maintenance_task_prefetch(struct maintenance_run_opts *opts) · line 905
Quoted 9 lines
builtin/gc.c +6
-0@@ -897,6 +897,12 @@ static int maintenance_task_prefetch(struct maintenance_run_opts *opts)struct string_list_item *item;struct string_list remotes =STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP ; +git_config_set_multivar_gently ("log.excludedecoration" , +"refs/prefetch/" , +"refs/prefetch/" , +CONFIG_FLAGS_FIXED_VALUE | +CONFIG_FLAGS_MULTI_REPLACE ); +
OK; this is a good way to ensure that you're not constantly appending 'refs/prefetch' into the config.
I did notice that we have a 'remotes' string list just above, so I suppose we could only ignore 'refs/prefetch/<remote>' for just the remotes that we know about, but I doubt that this would be all that useful. (I.e., are there really users that are using refs/prefetch already and don't want to hide the parts of it that aren't managed by maintenance? Doubtful.)
Quoted 8 lines
builtin/gc.c +8
-0+test_expect_success 'prefetch and existing log.excludeDecoration values' ' + git config --unset-all log.excludeDecoration && + git config log.excludeDecoration refs/remotes/remote1/ && + git maintenance run --task=prefetch && + + git config --get-all log.excludeDecoration >out && + grep refs/remotes/remote1/ out && + grep refs/prefetch/ out &&
builtin/gc.c static int maintenance_task_prefetch(struct maintenance_run_opts *opts)
Quoted 10 lines
builtin/gc.c +10
-0+ + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log && + ! grep "prefetch" log && + ! grep "remote1" log && + grep "remote2" log && + +# a second run does not change the config + git maintenance run --task=prefetch && + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log2 && + test_cmp log log2
Great, this test matches what I would expect. Thank you!
Thanks,
Taylor
PATCH 2/2 t7900: clean up some broken refs
In reply to Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadgetFrom: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The tests for the 'prefetch' task create remotes and fetch refs into 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/' and tags into 'refs/tags/'. These tests use the remotes to create objects not intended to be seen by the "local" repository.
In that sense, the incrmental-repack tasks did not have these objects and refs in mind. That test replaces the object directory with a specific pack-file layout for testing the batch-size logic. However, this causes some operations to start showing warnings such as:
error: refs/prefetch/remote1/one does not point to a valid object!
error: refs/tags/one does not point to a valid object!
This only shows up if you run the tests verbosely and watch the output. It caught my eye and I _thought_ that there was a bug where 'git gc' or 'git repack' wouldn't check 'refs/prefetch/' before pruning objects. That is incorrect. Those commands do handle 'refs/prefetch/' correctly.
All that is left is to clean up the tests in t7900-maintenance.sh to remove these tags and refs that are not being repacked for the incremental-repack tests.
--- t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
t/t7900-maintenance.sh +5 -0
@@ -256,6 +256,11 @@ test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' HEAD ^HEAD~1 EOF + + # Replace the object directory with this pack layout. + # However, it does not include all objects from the remotes. + rm -rf .git/refs/prefetch && + rm -rf .git/refs/tags && rm -f $packDir/pack-* && rm -f $packDir/loose-* && ls $packDir/*.pack >packs-before &&
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Re: [PATCH 2/2] t7900: clean up some broken refs
Quoted 12 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
From: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The tests for the 'prefetch' task create remotes and fetch refs into 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/' and tags into 'refs/tags/'. These tests use the remotes to create objects not intended to be seen by the "local" repository.
In that sense, the incrmental-repack tasks did not have these objects and refs in mind. That test replaces the object directory with a specific pack-file layout for testing the batch-size logic. However, this causes some operations to start showing warnings such as:
Quoted 7 lines
error: refs/prefetch/remote1/one does not point to a valid object!
error: refs/tags/one does not point to a valid object!This only shows up if you run the tests verbosely and watch the output. It caught my eye and I _thought_ that there was a bug where 'git gc' or 'git repack' wouldn't check 'refs/prefetch/' before pruning objects. That is incorrect. Those commands do handle 'refs/prefetch/' correctly.
Do you think it would be worth checking that 'does not point to a valid object' doesn't appear in the output?
Quoted 14 lines
All that is left is to clean up the tests in
t7900-maintenance.shto remove these tags and refs that are not being repacked for the incremental-repack tests.Signed-off-by Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>--- t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)t/t7900-maintenance.sh +0
-0
t/t7900-maintenance.sh test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' · line 263
Quoted 8 lines
t/t7900-maintenance.sh +5
-0@@ -256,6 +256,11 @@ test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' HEAD ^HEAD~1 EOF + + # Replace the object directory with this pack layout. + # However, it does not include all objects from the remotes. + rm -rf .git/refs/prefetch && + rm -rf .git/refs/tags &&
Hmm. Makes sense, but this will certainly need to be updated to work with reftables, and it would break if you ran 'git pack-refs'.
Perhaps instead:
git for-each-ref --format='delete %(refname)' \
refs/prefetch refs/tags >refs &&
git update-ref --stdin <refs?
Thanks,
Taylor
Re: [PATCH 2/2] t7900: clean up some broken refs
Quoted 8 lines · Taylor Blau
Quoted 4 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
This only shows up if you run the tests verbosely and watch the output. It caught my eye and I _thought_ that there was a bug where 'git gc' or 'git repack' wouldn't check 'refs/prefetch/' before pruning objects. That is incorrect. Those commands do handle 'refs/prefetch/' correctly.
Do you think it would be worth checking that 'does not point to a valid object' doesn't appear in the output?
Perhaps, but I think this isn't an actually interesting behavior to test. It's really the test that was broken, not Git itself.
Quoted 26 lines
Quoted 14 lines
All that is left is to clean up the tests in
t7900-maintenance.shto remove these tags and refs that are not being repacked for the incremental-repack tests.Signed-off-by Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>--- t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)t/t7900-maintenance.sh +0
-0t/t7900-maintenance.sh test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' · line 263
Quoted 8 lines
t/t7900-maintenance.sh +5
-0@@ -256,6 +256,11 @@ test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' HEAD ^HEAD~1 EOF + + # Replace the object directory with this pack layout. + # However, it does not include all objects from the remotes. + rm -rf .git/refs/prefetch && + rm -rf .git/refs/tags &&Hmm. Makes sense, but this will certainly need to be updated to work with reftables, and it would break if you ran 'git pack-refs'.
Quoted 5 lines
Perhaps instead:
git for-each-ref --format='delete %(refname)' \ refs/prefetch refs/tags >refs && git update-ref --stdin <refs
Deleting refs in a clean way is probably good to do. I'm guessing you didn't use a pipe because it can be hard to diagnose a failure in the chain? That's probably reasonable.
Thanks,
-Stolee
v2 cover Two cleanups around 'prefetch' refs
In reply to Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadgetHere are a couple things that caught my eye during a recent evaluation of the maintenance feature:
1. 'refs/prefetch/' refs show up in 'git log' decorations. Auto-hide these.
2. t7900-maintenance.sh had some scary warnings that end up being unimportant.
This is based on 'master' at 66e871b (The third batch, 2021-01-15).
Update in v2: deleting refs more safely for alternate ref backends. (Thanks, Taylor!)
Thanks, -Stolee
Derrick Stolee (2):
maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch
t7900: clean up some broken refs
builtin/gc.c | 6 ++++++ t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
base-commit: 66e871b6647ffea61a77a0f82c7ef3415f1ee79c
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-838%2Fderrickstolee%2Fprefetch-refs-v2
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-838/derrickstolee/prefetch-refs-v2
Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/838
Range-diff vs v1:
1: 5b2ce9049a6 = 1: 5b2ce9049a6 maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch 2: 616b73a6556 ! 2: 35038dfd037 t7900: clean up some broken refs
@@ Commit message
All that is left is to clean up the tests in t7900-maintenance.sh to remove these tags and refs that are not being repacked for the
- incremental-repack tests.
+ incremental-repack tests. Use update-ref to ensure this works with all
+ ref backends.
+ Helped-by: Taylor Blau <[email protected]>
## t/t7900-maintenance.sh ##
@@ t/t7900-maintenance.sh: test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' '
^HEAD~1
EOF
+
++ # Delete refs that have not been repacked in these packs.
++ git for-each-ref --format="delete %(refname)" \
++ refs/prefetch refs/tags >refs &&
++ git update-ref --stdin <refs &&
++
+ # Replace the object directory with this pack layout.
-+ # However, it does not include all objects from the remotes.
-+ rm -rf .git/refs/prefetch &&
-+ rm -rf .git/refs/tags &&
rm -f $packDir/pack-* &&
rm -f $packDir/loose-* &&
ls $packDir/*.pack >packs-before &&
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
PATCH v2 1/2 maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch
From: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The 'prefetch' task fetches refs from all remotes and places them in the refs/prefetch/<remote>/ refspace. As this task is intended to run in the background, this allows users to keep their local data very close to the remote servers' data while not updating the users' understanding of the remote refs in refs/remotes/<remote>/.
However, this can clutter 'git log' decorations with copies of the refs with the full name 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/<branch>'.
The log.excludeDecoration config option was added in a6be5e67 (log: add log.excludeDecoration config option, 2020-05-16) for exactly this purpose.
Ensure we set this only for users that would benefit from it by assigning it at the beginning of the prefetch task. Other alternatives would be during 'git maintenance register' or 'git maintenance start', but those might assign the config even when the prefetch task is disabled by existing config. Further, users could run 'git maintenance run --task=prefetch' using their own scripting or scheduling. This provides the best coverage to automatically update the config when valuable.
It is improbable, but possible, that users might want to run the prefetch task _and_ see these refs in their log decorations. This seems incredibly unlikely to me, but users can always opt-in on a command-by-command basis using --decorate-refs=refs/prefetch/.
Test that this works in a few cases. In particular, ensure that our assignment of log.excludeDecoration=refs/prefetch/ is additive to other existing exclusions. Further, ensure we do not add multiple copies in multiple runs.
--- builtin/gc.c | 6 ++++++ t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
builtin/gc.c +6 -0
@@ -897,6 +897,12 @@ static int maintenance_task_prefetch(struct maintenance_run_opts *opts)struct string_list_item *item;struct string_list remotes =STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP ; +git_config_set_multivar_gently ("log.excludedecoration" , +"refs/prefetch/" , +"refs/prefetch/" , +CONFIG_FLAGS_FIXED_VALUE | +CONFIG_FLAGS_MULTI_REPLACE ); +if (for_each_remote (append_remote, &remotes)) {error (_ ("failed to fill remotes" )); result =1 ;
t/t7900-maintenance.sh +25 -1
@@ -149,7 +149,31 @@ test_expect_success 'prefetch multiple remotes' ' git log prefetch/remote2/two && git fetch --all && test_cmp_rev refs/remotes/remote1/one refs/prefetch/remote1/one && - test_cmp_rev refs/remotes/remote2/two refs/prefetch/remote2/two + test_cmp_rev refs/remotes/remote2/two refs/prefetch/remote2/two && + + test_cmp_config refs/prefetch/ log.excludedecoration && + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log && + ! grep "prefetch" log +' + +test_expect_success 'prefetch and existing log.excludeDecoration values' ' + git config --unset-all log.excludeDecoration && + git config log.excludeDecoration refs/remotes/remote1/ && + git maintenance run --task=prefetch && + + git config --get-all log.excludeDecoration >out && + grep refs/remotes/remote1/ out && + grep refs/prefetch/ out && + + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log && + ! grep "prefetch" log && + ! grep "remote1" log && + grep "remote2" log && + + # a second run does not change the config + git maintenance run --task=prefetch && + git log --oneline --decorate --all >log2 && + test_cmp log log2 ' test_expect_success 'loose-objects task' '
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] maintenance: set log.excludeDecoration durin prefetch
Quoted 15 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
From: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The 'prefetch' task fetches refs from all remotes and places them in the refs/prefetch/<remote>/ refspace. As this task is intended to run in the background, this allows users to keep their local data very close to the remote servers' data while not updating the users' understanding of the remote refs in refs/remotes/<remote>/.
However, this can clutter 'git log' decorations with copies of the refs with the full name 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/<branch>'.
The log.excludeDecoration config option was added in
a6be5e67(log: add log.excludeDecoration config option, 2020-05-16) for exactly this purpose.
Quoted 8 lines
Ensure we set this only for users that would benefit from it by assigning it at the beginning of the prefetch task. Other alternatives would be during 'git maintenance register' or 'git maintenance start', but those might assign the config even when the prefetch task is disabled by existing config. Further, users could run 'git maintenance run --task=prefetch' using their own scripting or scheduling. This provides the best coverage to automatically update the config when valuable.
OK. I think those users who keep distance from "git maintenance" are different story but all others cannot be using refs/prefetch/ hierarchy for purposes other than "git maintenance" dictates, so "git maintenance [register|start]", or even when the user first runs "git maintenance" for that matter, would be acceptable point to add the configuration, but at the beginning of a prefetch task, we know the hierarchy is being used for what "git maintenance" wants to do, so it is a good place to do so.
But playing devil's advocate, I do not think throwing refs/prefetch into a "hardcoded list of hierarchies that would never be used for decoration purposes" would upset any end-users in practice. The only reason why I do not make such a suggestion is it is more work (such a hardcoded reject list does not exist, if I recall correctly).
Quoted 4 lines
It is improbable, but possible, that users might want to run the prefetch task _and_ see these refs in their log decorations. This seems incredibly unlikely to me, but users can always opt-in on a command-by-command basis using --decorate-refs=refs/prefetch/.
It is not a viable workaround to add "--decorate-refs=refs/prefetch" that is a mouthful; configuration options are to reduce such typing, not to force more of them. But because I agree with that "incredibly unlikely" assessment, I do not care.
Thanks.
PATCH v2 2/2 t7900: clean up some broken refs
In reply to Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadgetFrom: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The tests for the 'prefetch' task create remotes and fetch refs into 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/' and tags into 'refs/tags/'. These tests use the remotes to create objects not intended to be seen by the "local" repository.
In that sense, the incrmental-repack tasks did not have these objects and refs in mind. That test replaces the object directory with a specific pack-file layout for testing the batch-size logic. However, this causes some operations to start showing warnings such as:
error: refs/prefetch/remote1/one does not point to a valid object!
error: refs/tags/one does not point to a valid object!
This only shows up if you run the tests verbosely and watch the output. It caught my eye and I _thought_ that there was a bug where 'git gc' or 'git repack' wouldn't check 'refs/prefetch/' before pruning objects. That is incorrect. Those commands do handle 'refs/prefetch/' correctly.
All that is left is to clean up the tests in t7900-maintenance.sh to remove these tags and refs that are not being repacked for the incremental-repack tests. Use update-ref to ensure this works with all ref backends.
--- t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
t/t7900-maintenance.sh +7 -0
@@ -256,6 +256,13 @@ test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' HEAD ^HEAD~1 EOF + + # Delete refs that have not been repacked in these packs. + git for-each-ref --format="delete %(refname)" \ + refs/prefetch refs/tags >refs && + git update-ref --stdin <refs && + + # Replace the object directory with this pack layout. rm -f $packDir/pack-* && rm -f $packDir/loose-* && ls $packDir/*.pack >packs-before &&
Signature · 1 line
gitgitgadget
Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] t7900: clean up some broken refs
Quoted 7 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
From: Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>
The tests for the 'prefetch' task create remotes and fetch refs into 'refs/prefetch/<remote>/' and tags into 'refs/tags/'. These tests use the remotes to create objects not intended to be seen by the "local" repository.
Quoted 7 lines
In that sense, the incrmental-repack tasks did not have these objects and refs in mind. That test replaces the object directory with a specific pack-file layout for testing the batch-size logic. However, this causes some operations to start showing warnings such as:
error: refs/prefetch/remote1/one does not point to a valid object!
error: refs/tags/one does not point to a valid object!
So we use prefetch refs but craft a repacking strategy in such a way that these prefetch refs do not act as anchors, deliberately breaking the repository and invalidating the prefetch refs so to speak?
Wow, that sounds like an evil and brittle test set-up.
Quoted 34 lines
This only shows up if you run the tests verbosely and watch the output. It caught my eye and I _thought_ that there was a bug where 'git gc' or 'git repack' wouldn't check 'refs/prefetch/' before pruning objects. That is incorrect. Those commands do handle 'refs/prefetch/' correctly.
All that is left is to clean up the tests in
t7900-maintenance.shto remove these tags and refs that are not being repacked for the incremental-repack tests. Use update-ref to ensure this works with all ref backends.Helped-by Taylor Blau <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Derrick Stolee <[email protected]>--- t/t7900-maintenance.sh | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)t/t7900-maintenance.sh +7
-0@@ -256,6 +256,13 @@ test_expect_success 'incremental-repack task' ' HEAD ^HEAD~1 EOF + + # Delete refs that have not been repacked in these packs. + git for-each-ref --format="delete %(refname)" \ + refs/prefetch refs/tags >refs && + git update-ref --stdin <refs && + + # Replace the object directory with this pack layout. rm -f $packDir/pack-* && rm -f $packDir/loose-* && ls $packDir/*.pack >packs-before &&
Quoted 2 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
Update in v2: deleting refs more safely for alternate ref backends. (Thanks, Taylor!)
The range-diff looks good to me, thanks!
Thanks,
Taylor
Quoted 7 lines · Taylor Blau
Quoted 2 lines · Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
Update in v2: deleting refs more safely for alternate ref backends. (Thanks, Taylor!)
The range-diff looks good to me, thanks!
Reviewed-by Taylor Blau <[email protected]>
Thanks, both.