Re: git and larger trees, not so fast?

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 9, 2007, 22:02 UTC
Message-ID: <7vtzr8wemb.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0708091444550.25146@woody.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:

Show 16 quoted lines

> On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> 
>> So "builtin-read-tree.c" (or rather unpack-trees.c) would need the same 
>> kind of logic.
>
> The path seems to be:
>
>   cmd_read_tree ->
>     unpack_trees ->
>       unpack_trees_rec ->
>         [ recursive .. unpack_trees_rec ] ->
> 	  oneway_merge ->
> 	    keep_entry ->
> 	      add_index_entry()
>
> and here again we end up having the same insertion sort issue.

Quite honestly, I was this (shows the "thumb and index finger almost touching" gesture) close to declare that unpack-trees is unsalvageable, and was planning to redo the one-tree (and perhaps two-tree) read-tree without using that mess after 1.5.3.