Re: [PATCH 3/5] tree-walk: micro-optimization in tree_entry_interesting
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 30, 2011, 20:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v62le1vlx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAEik5nNaDkAa2+63g1z3c1JUB8sLuTLfYP3jLKZJg2=yKqyzDg@mail.gmail.com>
Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com> writes:
Show 15 quoted lines
>> dmcgee@galway ~/projects/linux-2.6 (master) >> $ time ../git/git-log -- zzzzz_not_exist > /dev/null >> >> real 0m0.945s >> user 0m0.857s >> sys 0m0.083s >> >>> There is nothing wrong in the patch per-se, but I really wish we didn't >>> have to do this; it feels like the compiler should be helping us in this >>> case. > > If I resurrect this with an updated commit message reflecting concerns > raised, can it be merged? Given that it is a noticeable performance > boost on real-life repositories and I can show it has little (<1%) to > no impact on most repos, it is a definite win.
I do not see anything wrong in this particular patch per-se, but I really wish we didn't have to do this.
Please include a few lines of benchmarking result in the updated commit log message as well if you are rerolling this patch, perhaps like I did in:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/179926/focus=180361
i.e., before and after comparison.
Thanks.