From: Phillip Wood Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2021 11:18:03 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] reset: make sparse-aware (except --mixed) Message-ID: <47d4c810-0b56-45b0-944c-72c4d047f9b6@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On 08/10/2021 19:31, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Victoria Dye writes: > >> Phillip Wood wrote: > >>> I was looking at the callers to prime_cache_tree() this morning >>> and would like to suggest an alternative approach - just delete >>> prime_cache_tree() and all of its callers! > > Do you mean the calls added by new patches without understanding > what they are doing, or all calls to it? I mean all calls to prime_cache_tree() after having understood (or at least thinking that I understand) what they are doing. As I tried to explain in the part of my message that you have cut (a) a successful call to unpack_trees() updates the cache tree (b) all the existing calls to prime_cache_tree() follow a successful call to unpack_trees() and nothing touches in index in between the call to unpack_trees() and prime_cache_tree(). Maybe I've misunderstood something but that leads me believe those calls can be removed without degrading performance. Best Wishes Phillip > Every time you update a path in the index from the working tree > (e.g. "git add") and other sources, the directory in the cache-tree > that includes the path is invalidated, and the surviving subtrees of > cache-tree is used to speed up writing the index as a tree object, > doing "diff-index --cached" (hence "git status"), etc. So over > time, the cache-tree "degrades" as you muck with the index entries. > > When you write out the index as a tree, we by definition have to > know the object names of all the tree objects that correspond to > each directory in the index. A fully valid cache-tree is saved when > it happens, so the above process can start over. > > There are cases other than "git write-tree" that we can cheaply > learn the object names of all the tree objects that correspond to > each directory in the index. When we read the index from an > existing tree object, we know which tree (and its subtrees) we > populated the index from, so we can salvage a degraded cache-tree. > > "reset --hard" and "reset --mixed" may be good opportunities, so is > "checkout " that starts from a clean index. And cache tree > priming is a mechanism to take advantage of such an opportunity. > > The cache-tree does not have to be primed and all you lose is > performance, so priming can be removed mostly "without an issue", if > you are not paying attention to cache-tree degradation. Priming > with incorrect data, however, would leave permanent damage by > writing a wrong tree via "git write-tree" (hence "git commit") and > showing a wrong diff via "git diff-index [--cached]" (hence "git > status" and probably "git add -- "), so not priming is > safer than priming incorrectly. > > HTH. >