提交 02abc6be 编写于 作者: J Junio C Hamano

Merge branch 'mh/avoid-rewriting-packed-refs' into maint

Recent update to the refs infrastructure implementation started
rewriting packed-refs file more often than before; this has been
optimized again for most trivial cases.

* mh/avoid-rewriting-packed-refs:
  files-backend: don't rewrite the `packed-refs` file unnecessarily
  t1409: check that `packed-refs` is not rewritten unnecessarily
......@@ -2605,7 +2605,23 @@ static int files_transaction_prepare(struct ref_store *ref_store,
goto cleanup;
}
backend_data->packed_refs_locked = 1;
ret = ref_transaction_prepare(packed_transaction, err);
if (is_packed_transaction_needed(refs->packed_ref_store,
packed_transaction)) {
ret = ref_transaction_prepare(packed_transaction, err);
} else {
/*
* We can skip rewriting the `packed-refs`
* file. But we do need to leave it locked, so
* that somebody else doesn't pack a reference
* that we are trying to delete.
*/
if (ref_transaction_abort(packed_transaction, err)) {
ret = TRANSACTION_GENERIC_ERROR;
goto cleanup;
}
backend_data->packed_transaction = NULL;
}
}
cleanup:
......
......@@ -1261,6 +1261,100 @@ static int write_with_updates(struct packed_ref_store *refs,
return -1;
}
int is_packed_transaction_needed(struct ref_store *ref_store,
struct ref_transaction *transaction)
{
struct packed_ref_store *refs = packed_downcast(
ref_store,
REF_STORE_READ,
"is_packed_transaction_needed");
struct strbuf referent = STRBUF_INIT;
size_t i;
int ret;
if (!is_lock_file_locked(&refs->lock))
BUG("is_packed_transaction_needed() called while unlocked");
/*
* We're only going to bother returning false for the common,
* trivial case that references are only being deleted, their
* old values are not being checked, and the old `packed-refs`
* file doesn't contain any of those reference(s). This gives
* false positives for some other cases that could
* theoretically be optimized away:
*
* 1. It could be that the old value is being verified without
* setting a new value. In this case, we could verify the
* old value here and skip the update if it agrees. If it
* disagrees, we could either let the update go through
* (the actual commit would re-detect and report the
* problem), or come up with a way of reporting such an
* error to *our* caller.
*
* 2. It could be that a new value is being set, but that it
* is identical to the current packed value of the
* reference.
*
* Neither of these cases will come up in the current code,
* because the only caller of this function passes to it a
* transaction that only includes `delete` updates with no
* `old_id`. Even if that ever changes, false positives only
* cause an optimization to be missed; they do not affect
* correctness.
*/
/*
* Start with the cheap checks that don't require old
* reference values to be read:
*/
for (i = 0; i < transaction->nr; i++) {
struct ref_update *update = transaction->updates[i];
if (update->flags & REF_HAVE_OLD)
/* Have to check the old value -> needed. */
return 1;
if ((update->flags & REF_HAVE_NEW) && !is_null_oid(&update->new_oid))
/* Have to set a new value -> needed. */
return 1;
}
/*
* The transaction isn't checking any old values nor is it
* setting any nonzero new values, so it still might be able
* to be skipped. Now do the more expensive check: the update
* is needed if any of the updates is a delete, and the old
* `packed-refs` file contains a value for that reference.
*/
ret = 0;
for (i = 0; i < transaction->nr; i++) {
struct ref_update *update = transaction->updates[i];
unsigned int type;
struct object_id oid;
if (!(update->flags & REF_HAVE_NEW))
/*
* This reference isn't being deleted -> not
* needed.
*/
continue;
if (!refs_read_raw_ref(ref_store, update->refname,
oid.hash, &referent, &type) ||
errno != ENOENT) {
/*
* We have to actually delete that reference
* -> this transaction is needed.
*/
ret = 1;
break;
}
}
strbuf_release(&referent);
return ret;
}
struct packed_transaction_backend_data {
/* True iff the transaction owns the packed-refs lock. */
int own_lock;
......
......@@ -23,4 +23,13 @@ int packed_refs_lock(struct ref_store *ref_store, int flags, struct strbuf *err)
void packed_refs_unlock(struct ref_store *ref_store);
int packed_refs_is_locked(struct ref_store *ref_store);
/*
* Return true if `transaction` really needs to be carried out against
* the specified packed_ref_store, or false if it can be skipped
* (i.e., because it is an obvious NOOP). `ref_store` must be locked
* before calling this function.
*/
int is_packed_transaction_needed(struct ref_store *ref_store,
struct ref_transaction *transaction);
#endif /* REFS_PACKED_BACKEND_H */
#!/bin/sh
test_description='avoid rewriting packed-refs unnecessarily'
. ./test-lib.sh
# Add an identifying mark to the packed-refs file header line. This
# shouldn't upset readers, and it should be omitted if the file is
# ever rewritten.
mark_packed_refs () {
sed -e "s/^\(#.*\)/\1 t1409 /" <.git/packed-refs >.git/packed-refs.new &&
mv .git/packed-refs.new .git/packed-refs
}
# Verify that the packed-refs file is still marked.
check_packed_refs_marked () {
grep -q '^#.* t1409 ' .git/packed-refs
}
test_expect_success 'setup' '
git commit --allow-empty -m "Commit A" &&
A=$(git rev-parse HEAD) &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "Commit B" &&
B=$(git rev-parse HEAD) &&
git commit --allow-empty -m "Commit C" &&
C=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
'
test_expect_success 'do not create packed-refs file gratuitously' '
test_must_fail test -f .git/packed-refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/foo $A &&
test_must_fail test -f .git/packed-refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/foo $B &&
test_must_fail test -f .git/packed-refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/foo $C $B &&
test_must_fail test -f .git/packed-refs &&
git update-ref -d refs/heads/foo &&
test_must_fail test -f .git/packed-refs
'
test_expect_success 'check that marking the packed-refs file works' '
git for-each-ref >expected &&
git pack-refs --all &&
mark_packed_refs &&
check_packed_refs_marked &&
git for-each-ref >actual &&
test_cmp expected actual &&
git pack-refs --all &&
test_must_fail check_packed_refs_marked &&
git for-each-ref >actual2 &&
test_cmp expected actual2
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on update of packed' '
git update-ref refs/heads/packed-update $A &&
git pack-refs --all &&
mark_packed_refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/packed-update $B &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on checked update of packed' '
git update-ref refs/heads/packed-checked-update $A &&
git pack-refs --all &&
mark_packed_refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/packed-checked-update $B $A &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on verify of packed' '
git update-ref refs/heads/packed-verify $A &&
git pack-refs --all &&
mark_packed_refs &&
echo "verify refs/heads/packed-verify $A" | git update-ref --stdin &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'touch packed-refs on delete of packed' '
git update-ref refs/heads/packed-delete $A &&
git pack-refs --all &&
mark_packed_refs &&
git update-ref -d refs/heads/packed-delete &&
test_must_fail check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on update of loose' '
git pack-refs --all &&
git update-ref refs/heads/loose-update $A &&
mark_packed_refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/loose-update $B &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on checked update of loose' '
git pack-refs --all &&
git update-ref refs/heads/loose-checked-update $A &&
mark_packed_refs &&
git update-ref refs/heads/loose-checked-update $B $A &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on verify of loose' '
git pack-refs --all &&
git update-ref refs/heads/loose-verify $A &&
mark_packed_refs &&
echo "verify refs/heads/loose-verify $A" | git update-ref --stdin &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_expect_success 'leave packed-refs untouched on delete of loose' '
git pack-refs --all &&
git update-ref refs/heads/loose-delete $A &&
mark_packed_refs &&
git update-ref -d refs/heads/loose-delete &&
check_packed_refs_marked
'
test_done
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册