Re: [PATCH 06/12] clone: disable save_commit_buffer

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jan 25, 2017, 19:27 UTC
Message-ID: <20170125192740.5lqoc2srqfjiyfwr@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqmvefaray.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:11:01AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > Normally git caches the raw commit object contents in
> > "struct commit". This makes it fast to run parse_commit()
> > followed by a pretty-print operation.
> >
> > For commands which don't actually pretty-print the commits,
> > the caching is wasteful (and may use quite a lot of memory
> > if git accesses a large number of commits).
> >
> > For fetching operations like clone, we already disable
> 
> s/clone/fetch/ you meant?

Well, no, because this patch deals with clone.

It's likely that builtin/fetch.c would want the same treatment. It didn't come up for me because I've disabled the alternates check for that case (but you can't do that with stock git), and I didn't dig further.

Possibly this should just go into fetch-pack.c, right before we walk over all of the refs and call parse_object() and deref_tag() on all of them. It feels a little funny to tweak the global save_commit_buffer flag there, but it already do so in everything_local(), so I don't think we're really losing much.

Show 10 quoted lines

> > In one real-world case with a large number of tags, this
> > cut about 10MB off of clone's heap usage. Not spectacular,
> > but there's really no downside.
> 
> "There is no downside" is especially true in the modern world post
> v2.1, where get_commit_buffer() is what everybody has to go through
> to access this information.  I would have been very hesitant to
> accept a patch like this one if we didn't do that clean-up, as a
> stray codepath could have just done "commit->buffer" and segfaulted
> or said "ah, there is no message", neither of which is satisfactory.

Yep, I had a similar thought while writing it. I would have been very hesitant to propose it back then, too. :)

-Peff