Re: [PATCH 08/17] pack-objects: add --path-walk option

From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Date: Oct 31, 2024, 21:02 UTC
Message-ID: <ZyPwUmYI59Ov0peR@nand.local>
In-Reply-To: <1dd36099-1f3f-4078-9009-6c142723430c@gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 10:14:08PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> On 10/29/24 2:07 PM, Taylor Blau wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 12:54:04PM -0700, Jonathan Tan wrote:
>
> > Is the thinking there that we care mostly about 'git push' and 'git
> > repack' on the client-side?
> >
> > I don't think it's unreasonable necessarily, but I would add that
> > client-side users definitely do use bitmaps (though not delta islands),
> > either when working in a bare repository (where bitmaps are the default)
> > or when using 'git gc' (and/or through 'git maintenance') when
> > 'repack.writeBitmaps' is enabled.
> I suppose some users do use bitmaps, but in my experience, client-side
> pushes are slower with bitmaps because a typical target branch is
> faster to compute by doing a commit walk, at least when the bitmaps are
> older than the new commits in the topic branch. This may be outdated by
> now, as it has been a few years since I did a client-side test of
> bitmaps.

All true, though it's hard to estimate the size of "some". I share your intuition that bitmaps are often a drag on performance for the client-side because doing a pure commit walk is often faster, especially if the client has a reasonably up-to-date commit graph.

Thanks, Taylor