Re: on when to checksum
- From
- Tom Lord <lord@emf.net>
- Date
- Apr 20, 2005, 22:52 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200504202252.PAA16837@emf.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.58.0504201539180.6467@ppc970.osdl.org>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lord wrote: > > I think you have made a mistake by moving the sha1 checksum from the > zipped form to the inflated form. Here is why:
I'd have agreed with you (and I did, violently) if it wasn't for the performance issues. It makes a huge difference for write-tree, and to me, clearly performance _does_ matter.
Fractions of seconds may not sound like a lot, but they add up. I work with 200-patch series myself all the time, so I'm very sensitive to a 0.3 second difference in performance.
How many times per day do you invoke `write-tree' and why?
It takes a large multiple of `0.3s' to get me to take you seriously on this point.
I have long harbored the suspician that your perceived bandwidth implies that you process a lot of patches unread or barely read -- implying that your day-to-day bitslingling could/should largely be handled by an Arch-style patch-queue-manager (a script).
-t