Merged
Conversation
fd0
reviewed
Nov 21, 2020
Member
fd0
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, apart from the docs for ListPack() :)
Contributor
Author
|
Also rebased this to master as #3113 was merged. |
This was referenced Nov 22, 2020
Merged
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR change? What problem does it solve?
Cleans up code where pack (header) sizes are computed from index entries.
Now all code which takes assumptions on the pack format is either in
internal/packor inMasterIndex.PackSize(). This makes modification to the pack format more easy in the future.This PR introduces a small change in the new pruning algorithm (see #2718): Now the complete header is treated as "used space" within a pack, whereas before only the header length and header crypto were treated as "used space" + only the header entries of really used blobs. The difference however should be marginal and may only slightly change the decision which pack to repack and which to keep.
Was the change discussed in an issue or in the forum before?
see #3006
Checklist
changelog/unreleased/that describes the changes for our users - this is too technical for users to notice.gofmton the code in all commits