git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: 66 patches and counting

From
MFMartin Fick <mfick@codeaurora.org>
Date
Oct 6, 2011, 22:16 UTC
Message-ID
<201110061616.39381.mfick@codeaurora.org>
In-Reply-To
<4E8CCC55.9070408@alum.mit.edu>

On Wednesday, October 05, 2011 03:29:57 pm Michael Haggerty wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines
> My renovation of refs.c [1] is currently at 66 patches
> and counting. What can I say?: (1) I like to make
> changes in the smallest irreducible steps and (2) there
> is a lot that needed to be done in refs.c.
> 
> When I'm done, is it OK to dump a patch series like that
> on the git mailing list?  Is it pointless because nobody
> will review them anyway? Is a big pile of changes like
> this welcome in any form?  Would it be better to convey
> the changes via git itself (e.g., github) rather than
> via emails?
> 
> Michael
> 
> [1] hierarchical-refs at git://github.com/mhagger/git.git
Michael,
I downloaded your patch series and tested it on my repos.
Here are some of the timings I saw with your branch as is:
 * git clone                               2:50m  (same)
 * full fetch changes                  (> 1 hour) (bad!)
 * git branch (unpacked, ungced)            .7s   (good!)
 * git branch (packed, gced)                .18s  (~>same)
 * git checkout (unpacked, ungced)          10.5s (~>same)
 * git checkout (packed, gced)               9.5  (~>same)
 * noop fetch changes (unpacked, ungced)    14s   (~>same)
 * noop fetch changes (packed, gced)        12s   (same)

For the full fetch, I estimated, things were scrolling by slow enough that after about 15 min I interrupted it. I suspect it might be at least 6 times longer (if rate stayed the same).

Here are the best timings for all the good patches that others have submitted to fix many of the previous problems I brought up:

 * git clone                               2:50m
 * full fetch changes                      4:50m   
 * git branch (unpacked, ungced)              9s
 * git branch (packed, gced)                  .05s
 * git checkout (unpacked, ungced)            9s
 * git checkout (packed, gced)                8s
 * noop fetch changes (unpacked, ungced)     12s
 * noop fetch changes (packed, gced)         12s
(my internal patches bring full fetch down to 2:50m)

It would be nice if you could rebase your work on top of some of the other patches also so that I could see those results. I might give that a try if I have the time and it is easy (or I might rebase those patches on yours).

Thanks,
-Martin
-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. which is a 
member of Code Aurora Forum
Previous: Jonathan NiederNext: Martin Fick
Message 4 of 8 in “66 patches and counting”
  1. Michael HaggertyOct 5, 2011
  2. Junio C HamanoOct 5, 2011
  3. Jonathan NiederOct 5, 2011
  4. Martin FickOct 6, 2011
  5. Martin FickOct 7, 2011
  6. Michael HaggertyOct 7, 2011
  7. Scalable reference handlingMichael Haggerty, Oct 7, 2011
  8. Martin FickOct 7, 2011

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.