Re: Adding a new file as if it had existed
- From
- Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
- Date
- Dec 12, 2006, 12:26 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200612121226.32772.andyparkins@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7ac1e90c0612120332o20d6778bsa16a788fdc04a3a1@mail.gmail.com>
On Tuesday 2006 December 12 11:32, Bahadir Balban wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> If I don't know which files I may be touching in the future for > implementing some feature, then I am obliged to add all the files even > if they are irrelevant. I said "performance reasons" assuming all the > file hashes need checked for every commit -a to see if they're > changed, but I just tried on a PIII and it seems not so slow.
Here's a handy rule of thumb I've learned in my use of git:
"git is fast. Really fast."
That'll hold you in good stead. In my experience there is no operation in git that is slow. I've got some trees that are for embedded work and hold the whole linux kernel, often more than once. Subversion, which I used previously, took literally hours to import the whole tree. Git takes minutes.
As to your direct concern: git doesn't hash every file at every commit. There is no need. git has an "index" that is used to prepare a commit; at the time you do the actual commit, git already knows which files are being checked in. Obviously, Linus uses git for managing the linux kernel, he's said before that he wanted a version control system that can do multiple commits /per second/. git can do that.
In short - don't worry about making life easy for git - it's a workhorse and does a grand job.
Andy
-- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIEE