Re: More precise tag following

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Jan 27, 2007, 19:54 UTC
Message-ID: <epgaj2$bn9$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701271119300.25027@woody.linux-foundation.org>

Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

>> Quoth Simon 'corecode' Schubert:

Show 8 quoted lines

>>> git log kdelibs/README takes 1:18.  One minute, eighteen seconds.
>>> git rev-list and git blame take roughly the same time.
> 
> Btw, why do people even think this is "slow"?
> 
> Yeah, we should speed it up, just because I think having that large a repo 
> will make it more obvious what we can do even better. No question about 
> that.

[...]

> Basically, asking for "git log --since=1.week.ago" should be 
> constant-time, regardless of how big the history is (well, it obviously 
> depends on how many changes there have been in the last week, but the 
> point is that it shouldn't get slower over time).

[...]

> That's why "git blame" is so horrible. It's fundamentally an operation 
> that depends on "whole history" and thus cannot scale.

By the way, in git-blame you can also give the cutoff like in git-log; the lines which come from outside given revision range either get blamed on boundary, or are shown "unblamed".

I wonder if any other SCM's blame/annotate has that...

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git