Re: [PATCH 0/5] handling 4GB .idx files

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Dec 2, 2020, 13:12 UTC
Message-ID: <X8eS1Zrqk99AjKkD@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <X8aLDlzcNCwP699c@nand.local>

On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 01:27:26PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:

> I have a sense that probably very few people actually run GIT_TEST_LONG
> regularly, and that that group may vanish entirely if we added a test
> which increased the runtime of the suite by 20x in this mode.

Yeah, and if that's so, then I'm OK with calling it EXPENSIVE and moving on with our lives. And I guess merging this is one way to find out, if anybody screams. The stakes are low enough that I don't mind doing that.

Show 12 quoted lines

> I have mixed feelings about VERY_EXPENSIVE. On one hand, having this
> test checked in so that we can quickly refer back to it in the case of a
> regression is useful. On the other hand, what is it worth to have this
> in-tree if nobody ever runs it? I'm speculating about whether or not
> people would run this, of course.
> 
> My hunch is that anybody who is interested enough to fix regressions in
> this area would be able to refer back to the list archive to dig up this
> thread and recover the script.
> 
> I don't feel strongly, really, but just noting some light objections to
> checking this test into the suite.

Yeah, that about matches my feelings. But if Thomas wants to wrap it up as a patch, I don't mind seeing what happens (and I think with the suggestions I gave earlier, it would be in good shape).

-Peff