> -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff King [mailto:p...@peff.net] > Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 10:57 PM > To: Keller, Jacob E > Cc: gits...@pobox.com; dr.kh...@gmail.com; git@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [Bug] data loss with cyclic alternates > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 06:01:46PM +0000, Keller, Jacob E wrote: > > > > Yeah, don't do that. A thinks "eh, the other guy must have it" and > > > B thinks the same. In general, do not prune or gc a repository > > > other repositories borrow from, even if there is no cycle, because > > > the borrowee does not know anythning about objects that it itself no > > > longer needs but are still needed by its borrowers. > > > > > > > Doesn't gc get run automatically at some points? Is the automatic gc run > > setup to avoid this problem? > > No, the automatic gc doesn't avoid this. It can't in the general case, > as the parent repository does not know how many or which children are > pointed to it as an alternate. And the borrowing repository does not > even need to have write permission to the parent, so it cannot write a > backpointer. > > If people are using alternates, they should probably turn off gc.auto in > the borrowee (it doesn't seem unreasonable to me to do so automatically > via "clone -s" in cases where we can write to the alternates repo, and > to issue a warning otherwise). > > -Peff
Yes, if this is a known problem and we can avoid it by disabling garbage collection, that makes sense to me to do so.. Thanks, Jake
