Re: [PATCH] read-cache.c: fix index memory allocation
- From
René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
- Date
- Oct 24, 2011, 15:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <4EA58B63.8040800@lsrfire.ath.cx>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vipne50lz.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Am 24.10.2011 09:07, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
Show 11 quoted lines
> Thanks. > > This approach may be the most appropriate for the maintenance track, but > for the purpose of going forward, I wonder if we really want to keep the > "estimate and allocate a large pool, and carve out individual pieces". > > This bulk-allocate dates back to the days when we didn't have ondisk vs > incore representation differences, IIRC, and as the result we deliberately > leak cache entries whenever an entry in the index is replaced with a new > one. Does the overhead to allocate individually really kill us that much > for say a tree with 30k files in it?
Probably not; unpack_trees() does that already. (It calls create_ce_entry() via unpack_nondirectories() via unpack_callback() via traverse_trees()).
René