When deleting refs from the loose-files refs backend, then we need to be
careful to also delete the same ref from the packed refs backend, if it
exists. If we don't, then deleting the loose ref would "uncover" the
packed ref. We thus always have to queue up deletions of refs for both
the loose and the packed refs backend. This is done in two separate
transactions, where the end result is that the reference-transaction
hook is executed twice for the deleted refs.
This behaviour is quite misleading: it's exposing implementation details
of how the files backend works to the user, in contrast to the logical
updates that we'd really want to expose via the hook. Worse yet, whether
the hook gets executed once or twice depends on how well-packed the
repository is: if the ref only exists as a loose ref, then we execute it
once, otherwise if it is also packed then we execute it twice.
Fix this behaviour and don't execute the reference-transaction hook at
all when refs in the packed-refs backend if it's driven by the files
backend. This works as expected even in case the refs to be deleted only
exist in the packed-refs backend because the loose-backend always queues
refs in its own transaction even if they don't exist such that they can
be locked for concurrent creation. And it also does the right thing in
case neither of the backends has the ref because that would cause the
transaction to fail completely.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The reference-transaction hook is supposed to track logical changes to
references, but it currently also gets executed when packing refs in a
repository. This is unexpected and ultimately not all that useful:
packing refs is not supposed to result in any user-visible change to the
refs' state, and it ultimately is an implementation detail of how refs
stores work.
Fix this excessive execution of the hook when packing refs.
Reported-by: Waleed Khan <me@waleedkhan.name>
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add tests which demonstate that we're executing the
reference-transaction hook too often in some cases, which thus leaks
implementation details about the reference store's implementation
itself. Behaviour will be fixed in follow-up commits.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Carefully excluding t1309, which sees independent development elsewhere
at the time of writing, we transition above-mentioned tests to the
default branch name `main`. This trick was performed via
$ (cd t &&
sed -i -e 's/master/main/g' -e 's/MASTER/MAIN/g' \
-e 's/Master/Main/g' -e 's/naster/nain/g' -- t[01]*.sh &&
git checkout HEAD -- t1309\*)
Note that t5533 contains a variation of the name `master` (`naster`)
that we rename here, too.
This allows us to define `GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main`
for those tests.
Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In addition to the manual adjustment to let the `linux-gcc` CI job run
the test suite with `master` and then with `main`, this patch makes sure
that GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME is set in all test scripts
that currently rely on the initial branch name being `master by default.
To determine which test scripts to mark up, the first step was to
force-set the default branch name to `master` in
- all test scripts that contain the keyword `master`,
- t4211, which expects `t/t4211/history.export` with a hard-coded ref to
initialize the default branch,
- t5560 because it sources `t/t556x_common` which uses `master`,
- t8002 and t8012 because both source `t/annotate-tests.sh` which also
uses `master`)
This trick was performed by this command:
$ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/\(test-lib\|lib-\(bash\|cvs\|git-svn\)\|gitweb-lib\)\.sh$/i\
GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\
' $(git grep -l master t/t[0-9]*.sh) \
t/t4211*.sh t/t5560*.sh t/t8002*.sh t/t8012*.sh
After that, careful, manual inspection revealed that some of the test
scripts containing the needle `master` do not actually rely on a
specific default branch name: either they mention `master` only in a
comment, or they initialize that branch specificially, or they do not
actually refer to the current default branch. Therefore, the
aforementioned modification was undone in those test scripts thusly:
$ git checkout HEAD -- \
t/t0027-auto-crlf.sh t/t0060-path-utils.sh \
t/t1011-read-tree-sparse-checkout.sh \
t/t1305-config-include.sh t/t1309-early-config.sh \
t/t1402-check-ref-format.sh t/t1450-fsck.sh \
t/t2024-checkout-dwim.sh \
t/t2106-update-index-assume-unchanged.sh \
t/t3040-subprojects-basic.sh t/t3301-notes.sh \
t/t3308-notes-merge.sh t/t3423-rebase-reword.sh \
t/t3436-rebase-more-options.sh \
t/t4015-diff-whitespace.sh t/t4257-am-interactive.sh \
t/t5323-pack-redundant.sh t/t5401-update-hooks.sh \
t/t5511-refspec.sh t/t5526-fetch-submodules.sh \
t/t5529-push-errors.sh t/t5530-upload-pack-error.sh \
t/t5548-push-porcelain.sh \
t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh \
t/t5572-pull-submodule.sh t/t5608-clone-2gb.sh \
t/t5614-clone-submodules-shallow.sh \
t/t7508-status.sh t/t7606-merge-custom.sh \
t/t9302-fast-import-unpack-limit.sh
We excluded one set of test scripts in these commands, though: the range
of `git p4` tests. The reason? `git p4` stores the (foreign) remote
branch in the branch called `p4/master`, which is obviously not the
default branch. Manual analysis revealed that only five of these tests
actually require a specific default branch name to pass; They were
modified thusly:
$ sed -i '/^ *\. \.\/lib-git-p4\.sh$/i\
GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=master\
export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME\
' t/t980[0167]*.sh t/t9811*.sh
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The test added by e5256c82e5 (refs: fix interleaving hook calls with
reference-transaction hook, 2020-08-07) uses hard-coded sha1 object ids
in its expected output. This causes it to fail when run with
GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_HASH=sha256.
Let's make use of the oid variables we define earlier, as the rest of
the nearby tests do.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Reviewed-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In order to not repeatedly search for the reference-transaction hook in
case it's getting called multiple times, we use a caching mechanism to
only call `find_hook()` once. What was missed though is that the return
value of `find_hook()` actually comes from a static strbuf, which means
it will get overwritten when calling `find_hook()` again. As a result,
we may call the wrong hook with parameters of the reference-transaction
hook.
This scenario was spotted in the wild when executing a git-push(1) with
multiple references, where there are interleaving calls to both the
update and the reference-transaction hook. While initial calls to the
reference-transaction hook work as expected, it will stop working after
the next invocation of the update hook. The result is that we now start
calling the update hook with parameters and stdin of the
reference-transaction hook.
This commit fixes the issue by storing a copy of `find_hook()`'s return
value in the cache.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The low-level reference transactions used to update references are
currently completely opaque to the user. While certainly desirable in
most usecases, there are some which might want to hook into the
transaction to observe all queued reference updates as well as observing
the abortion or commit of a prepared transaction.
One such usecase would be to have a set of replicas of a given Git
repository, where we perform Git operations on all of the repositories
at once and expect the outcome to be the same in all of them. While
there exist hooks already for a certain subset of Git commands that
could be used to implement a voting mechanism for this, many others
currently don't have any mechanism for this.
The above scenario is the motivation for the new "reference-transaction"
hook that reaches directly into Git's reference transaction mechanism.
The hook receives as parameter the current state the transaction was
moved to ("prepared", "committed" or "aborted") and gets via its
standard input all queued reference updates. While the exit code gets
ignored in the "committed" and "aborted" states, a non-zero exit code in
the "prepared" state will cause the transaction to be aborted
prematurely.
Given the usecase described above, a voting mechanism can now be
implemented via this hook: as soon as it gets called, it will take all
of stdin and use it to cast a vote to a central service. When all
replicas of the repository agree, the hook will exit with zero,
otherwise it will abort the transaction by returning non-zero. The most
important upside is that this will catch _all_ commands writing
references at once, allowing to implement strong consistency for
reference updates via a single mechanism.
In order to test the impact on the case where we don't have any
"reference-transaction" hook installed in the repository, this commit
introduce two new performance tests for git-update-refs(1). Run against
an empty repository, it produces the following results:
Test origin/master HEAD
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1400.2: update-ref 2.70(2.10+0.71) 2.71(2.10+0.73) +0.4%
1400.3: update-ref --stdin 0.21(0.09+0.11) 0.21(0.07+0.14) +0.0%
The performance test p1400.2 creates, updates and deletes a branch a
thousand times, thus averaging runtime of git-update-refs over 3000
invocations. p1400.3 instead calls `git-update-refs --stdin` three times
and queues a thousand creations, updates and deletes respectively.
As expected, p1400.3 consistently shows no noticeable impact, as for
each batch of updates there's a single call to access(3P) for the
negative hook lookup. On the other hand, for p1400.2, one can see an
impact caused by this patchset. But doing five runs of the performance
tests where each one was run with GIT_PERF_REPEAT_COUNT=10, the overhead
ranged from -1.5% to +1.1%. These inconsistent performance numbers can
be explained by the overhead of spawning 3000 processes. This shows that
the overhead of assembling the hook path and executing access(3P) once
to check if it's there is mostly outweighed by the operating system's
overhead.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
