Re: [WISH] Store also tag dereferences in packed-refs

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 20, 2006, 11:33 UTC
Message-ID: <200611201233.02581.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vu00u2wln.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> ... I mean you trust (use) reference
>> info from packed-refs, but don't trust lack of dereference in
>> packed-refs.
> 
> That is exactly what the code does (at least that was the intent;
> there could be bugs since I am not Linus ;-).

The question is: is it more common case to have very large number of heavyweight tags, or is it more common case to have very large number of lightweight tags (refs to commit objects).

In the latter case the solution to not trust lack of dereference means no gain in performance (although for the core checking type of object is faster (much faster?) than depeeling tag, so the gain wouldn't be large), although the solution is probably safer.

Still, the decision: do not trust the lack of dereference in packed-refs, or mark packed-refs as having dereferences and trust lack of dereferences, is fairly orthogonal to the format for depeel in packed-refs.

P.S. I have just noticed that you have taken the discussion off-list...

-- 
Jakub Narebski