Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-14 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Jeff King wrote: >> If an object is reused, we already know its compressed size. If it's >> not reused and is a loose object, we could use on-disk size. It's a >> lot harder to estimate an not-reused, deltified object. All we have is >> the uncompressed size, and

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-14 Thread Jeff King
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 05:21:59PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Michael Haggerty > wrote: > > Would it be practical to change it to a percentage of bytes written? > > Then we'd have progress info that is both convenient *and* truthful. > > I agreed for a second, t

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-14 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote: > Would it be practical to change it to a percentage of bytes written? > Then we'd have progress info that is both convenient *and* truthful. I agreed for a second, then remembered that we don't know the final pack size until we finish writ

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-14 Thread Michael Haggerty
On 03/13/2014 11:07 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 03:01:09PM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote: > >>> It would definitely be good to have throughput measurements while >>> writing out the pack. However, I'm not sure we have anything useful to >>> count. We know the total number of objects

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-13 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 06:07:54PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > 3. Use the regular "Writing objects" progress, but fake the object > count. We know we are writing M bytes with N objects. Bump the > counter by 1 for every M/N bytes we write. Here is that strategy. I think it looks pretty

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-13 Thread Junio C Hamano
Jeff King writes: > There are a few ways around this: > > 1. Add a new phase "Writing packs" which counts from 0 to 1. Even > though it's more accurate, moving from 0 to 1 really isn't that > useful (the throughput is, but the 0/1 just looks like noise). > > 2. Add a new phase "Writ

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-13 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 03:01:09PM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote: > > It would definitely be good to have throughput measurements while > > writing out the pack. However, I'm not sure we have anything useful to > > count. We know the total number of objects we're reusing, but we're not > > actually pa

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-13 Thread Shawn Pearce
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 05:21:21PM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote: > >> Today I tried pushing a copy of linux.git from a client that had >> bitmaps into a JGit server. The client stalled for a long time with no >> progress, because it reused the exist

Re: No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-13 Thread Jeff King
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 05:21:21PM -0700, Shawn Pearce wrote: > Today I tried pushing a copy of linux.git from a client that had > bitmaps into a JGit server. The client stalled for a long time with no > progress, because it reused the existing pack. No progress appeared > while it was sending the

No progress from push when using bitmaps

2014-03-12 Thread Shawn Pearce
Today I tried pushing a copy of linux.git from a client that had bitmaps into a JGit server. The client stalled for a long time with no progress, because it reused the existing pack. No progress appeared while it was sending the existing file on the wire: $ git push git://localhost/linux.git mas