On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Jonathan Tan <jonathanta...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sep 2017 10:39:35 +0200 > Christian Couder <christian.cou...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> From the following email: >> >> https://public-inbox.org/git/20170804145113.5ceaf...@twelve2.svl.corp.google.com/ >> >> it looks like his work is fundamentally about changing the rules of >> connectivity checks. Objects are split between "homegrown" objects and >> "imported" objects which are in separate pack files. Then references >> to imported objects are not checked during connectivity check. >> >> I think changing connectivity rules is not necessary to make something >> like external odb work. For example when fetching a pack that refers >> to objects that are in an external odb, if access this external odb >> has been configured, then the connectivity check will pass as the >> missing objects in the pack will be seen as already part of the repo. > > There are still some nuances. For example, if an external ODB provides > both a tree and a blob that the tree references, do we fetch the tree in > order to call "have" on all its blobs, or do we trust the ODB that if it > has the tree, it has all the other objects? In my design, I do the > latter, but in the general case where we have multiple ODBs, we might > have to do the former. (And if we do the former, it seems to me that the > connectivity check must be performed "online" - that is, with the ODBs > being able to provide "get".)
Yeah, I agree that the problem is more complex if there can be trees or all kind of objects in the external odb. But as I explain in the following email to Junio, I don't think storing other kind of objects is one of the most interesting use case: https://public-inbox.org/git/CAP8UFD3=nutrf24clsok4hsgm3nxgh8sbzvpmcg7cnchj2z...@mail.gmail.com/ > (Also, my work extends all the way to fetch/clone [1], but admittedly I > have been taking it a step at a time and recently have only been > discussing how the local repo should handle the missing object > situation.) > > [1] > https://public-inbox.org/git/cover.1499800530.git.jonathanta...@google.com/ Yeah, I think your work is interesting and could perhaps be useful for external odbs as there could be situations that would be handled better using your work or something similar.
