On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 10:56:18PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > > > Even more importantly though, a numeric offset would be invalidated by a > > concurrent write in case that write ends up inserting a ref in the range > > of commits you intend to skip now. > > That argument cuts both ways, no? You have shown up to some ref > which you remember in the last cycle, and then while you are > planning to formulate another query with --skip-until naming that > ref, somebody removes that ref, then what happens? This ref was already yielded, and it wouldn't and shouldn't be yielded on the next page. This works as expected with the proposal, as `--skip-until` does not care whether the value itself actually exists. > Or somebody inserts a new ref that sorts earlier than the ref you > stopped at the last time. It wouldn't and shouldn't be shown. When I have already yielded all refs up to refs/heads/something, I don't expect to see any ref that sorts before refs/heads/something on the next page. Patrick
