From: Tom Lord Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:52:33 GMT Subject: Re: on when to checksum Message-ID: <200504202252.PAA16837@emf.net> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds 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