Re: using tree as attribute source is slow, was Re: Help troubleshoot performance regression cloning with depth: git 2.44 vs git 2.42
- From
Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 2, 2024, 19:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAOLa=ZRe6eWJ_ZyH+HRq=6Lh0-xZ=1X2Z2f3HW4+EVXNquaDTQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <ZjPTlrMdpI+jXxyW@nand.local>
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
Show 20 quoted lines
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 10:44:20AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:
>>
>> > Instead, this patch changes the behavior to only fallback to "HEAD" in
>> > bare repositories from check-attr, but leaves pack-objects, archive, and
>> > all other builtins alone.
>>
>> I thought the whole point of the exercise was to allow server-side
>> (which typically is bare and cannot use anything from the working
>> tree) to pay attention to the attributes. This patch rips that out
>> and piles even more new and unproven code on top? I am not sure.
>
> I thought the point of John's patch was to allow just check-attr to read
> from HEAD^{tree} in bare repositories, and not to touch other commands.
>
> I could be misunderstanding the original intent of John's patch (the
> commit message there isn't clear whether the change was intended to
> target just check-attr or all of Git). But my hope is that it was the
> former, which this patch preserves.
>From the series [1] it becomes more clear that the intention was to target all commands.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1577.v5.git.git.1697218770.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/
Show 5 quoted lines
> I do not know whether servers should in general be trusting > user-provided attributes for things like "delta". > > Thanks, > Taylor