From: Abhradeep Chakraborty <chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:18:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] pack-bitmap: prepare to read lookup table extension
Message-ID: <20220622171814.46313-1-chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <YrNIJ6z+a4++MGQ8@nand.local>

Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:

> In other words, right now we have to do two queries when an commit
> doesn't have a bitmap stored:
>
>   - first, a lookup to see whether we have already loaded a bitmap for
>     that commit
>
>   - then, a subsequent lookup to see whether the .bitmap file itself has
>     a bitmap for that commit, but we just haven't loaded it yet
>
> If we knew that we had loaded all of the bitmaps in the file, then we
> could simplify the above two queries into one, since whatever the first
> one returns is enough to know whether or not a bitmap exists at all.

Hmm, agreed.

> Ahhh. Thanks for refreshing my memory. I wonder if you think there is a
> convenient way to work some of this into a short comment to help other
> readers in the future, too.

Actually, Derrick has suggested to go with iterative approach[1] instead of
Recursive approach. What's your view on it?

> Right, that part makes sense to me. But I wonder if we should still
> print something, perhaps just "Bitmap v1 test" or "Bitmap v1 test (%d
> entries)" omitting the "loaded" part.

Yeah, of course we can!

Thanks :)

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/92dc6860-ff35-0989-5114-fe1e220ca10c@github.com/