Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] environment, fsck: introduce lazyobject extension

Jonathan Tan writes: >> > extern int repository_format_precious_objects; >> > +extern char *repository_format_lazy_object; >> >> This is not a new problem, but I think these two should be >> called repository_extension_$NAME not repository_format_$NAME. > > Looking at

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] environment, fsck: introduce lazyobject extension

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 11:55:46 -0700 Junio C Hamano wrote: > My reading hiccupped after the first sentence, as the problem > description made it sound like this was a boolean ("are we using > lazy object feature?"), after reading "data type string". And then > "the command in

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] environment, fsck: introduce lazyobject extension

On 7/27/2017 2:55 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: Jonathan Tan writes: Currently, Git does not support repos with very large numbers of objects or repos that wish to minimize manipulation of certain blobs (for example, because they are very large) very well, even if the

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] environment, fsck: introduce lazyobject extension

Jonathan Tan writes: > Currently, Git does not support repos with very large numbers of objects > or repos that wish to minimize manipulation of certain blobs (for > example, because they are very large) very well, even if the user > operates mostly on part of the repo,

[RFC PATCH 1/4] environment, fsck: introduce lazyobject extension

Currently, Git does not support repos with very large numbers of objects or repos that wish to minimize manipulation of certain blobs (for example, because they are very large) very well, even if the user operates mostly on part of the repo, because Git is designed on the assumption that every