Re: [RFC] rename detection: allow more renames

From: Andreas Krey <a.krey@gmx.de>
Date: Nov 25, 2015, 12:03 UTC
Message-ID: <20151125120315.GC11192@inner.h.apk.li>
In-Reply-To: <20151124233328.GA13872@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Hi Jeff,

thanks for the reply!

On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:33:28 +0000, Jeff King wrote: ...

Show 5 quoted lines

> I didn't dig in the archive, but I think we discussed the "just show
> progress for destinations" before. The problem you run into is that the
> items aren't a good indication of the amount of work. You really are
> doing n*m work, so if you just count "m", it can be very misleading if
> "n" is high (and vice versa).

True, but the loops do progress indication for destinations only anyway. So if you only have three destinations and a zillion sources, you will still get only three progress updates, even if they say 'one zillion (33%)', 'two zillion (67%)', ...

I think as long as this is the case we can as well report the destination count; maybe put the source count somewhere in the progress text.

> Might it make more sense just to move to a larger integer size?

Which would be? I'd venture into the progress code to identify the necessary changes.

> Or
> perhaps to allow a higher limit for each side as long as the product of
> the sides does not overflow?

We're somewhat close to getting there. The rename detection runs for several minutes in our cases.

Andreas

-- 
"Totally trivial. Famous last words."
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800