Re: [PATCH 07/11] pack-objects: move in_pack out of struct object_entry

2018-03-01 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 9:49 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 04:10:48PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > >> Instead of using 8 bytes (on 64 bit arch) to store a pointer to a >> pack. Use an index isntead since the number of packs should be >> relatively small. >>

Re: [PATCH 07/11] pack-objects: move in_pack out of struct object_entry

2018-03-01 Thread Junio C Hamano
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: > Instead of using 8 bytes (on 64 bit arch) to store a pointer to a > pack. Use an index isntead since the number of packs should be > relatively small. > > This limits the number of packs we can handle to 256 (still > unreasonably high for a repo

Re: [PATCH 07/11] pack-objects: move in_pack out of struct object_entry

2018-03-01 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 04:10:48PM +0700, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > Instead of using 8 bytes (on 64 bit arch) to store a pointer to a > pack. Use an index isntead since the number of packs should be > relatively small. > > This limits the number of packs we can handle to 256 (still >

Re: [PATCH 07/11] pack-objects: move in_pack out of struct object_entry

2018-03-01 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
On Thu, Mar 01 2018, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy jotted: > pack. Use an index isntead since the number of packs should be s/isntead/instead/ > This limits the number of packs we can handle to 256 (still > unreasonably high for a repo to work well). If you have more than 256 > packs, you'll need an