Re: [PATCH] ls-tree: show size of trees with -l

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 14, 2010, 14:40 UTC
Message-ID: <201008141640.14745.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1281730823-10797-1-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com>

On Fri, 13 Apr 2010, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:

> In commit a5bbda8 (Add an option to git-ls-tree to display also the
> size of blob), Jakub said that size of non-blob entries had no
> meaning therefore dashes were printed instead.

I wrote that?

Show 12 quoted lines

> 
> I would say tree size, along with blob size, helps estimate bandwidth
> needed to transfer a single commit, for example. Of course it's not
> completely accurate as all objects will be compressed. But it gives a
> rough figure to compare.
> 
> Pack v4 has not come yet (and it's been three years, I truely hope it
> will come next year). When it comes, I will gladly send a revert patch
> of this one if it proves too expensive to compute tree size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
> ---

Actually "git ls-tree -l <tree-ish>" doesn't show size of tree objects because packv4 was to be ready soon, and in packv4 trees would be stored decomposed, so getting size of tree object (e.g. using git-cat-file) is would be costly because git would have to re-generate tree object just to get its size (if it is in packfile).

But we don't have packv4 yet, even though it is 3 years since a5bbda8. It looks like packv4 development moves with the speed of Perl 6 development. But if Rakudo * (Perl 6 implementation) could have get released (even if it is developers release), then there is hope for packv4 yet... I hope...

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland