Re: [RFC] rename detection: allow more renames

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Nov 25, 2015, 12:36 UTC
Message-ID: <20151125123625.GA4504@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20151125120315.GC11192@inner.h.apk.li>

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 01:03:15PM +0100, Andreas Krey wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

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

Ah, true. Though maybe that is something we should be fixing, rather than building on. I dunno. I cannot recall the last time I saw rename detection progress myself.

> > 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.

I was thinking of uint64_t; the progress code would need to change, but I don't see a big problem with that.

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

Yikes. :)

-Peff