From: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 16:20:17 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH on master v2] revision: use commit graph in get_reference()
Message-ID: <f1d40014-0e05-5fcb-cedc-e07a22c80628@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20181213012707.GC26210@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On 12/12/2018 8:27 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 11:58:12AM -0800, Jonathan Tan wrote:
>
>>> Yeah, this was the part that took me a bit to figure out, as well. The
>>> optimization here is really just avoiding a call to lookup_commit(),
>>> which will do a single hash-table lookup. I wonder if that's actually
>>> worth this more complex interface (as opposed to just always taking an
>>> oid and then always returning a "struct commit", which could be old or
>>> new).
>> Avoidance of lookup_commit() is more important than an optimization, I
>> think. Here, we call lookup_commit() only when we know that that object
>> is a commit (by its presence in a commit graph). If we just called it
>> blindly, we might mistakenly create a commit for that hash when it is
>> actually an object of another type. (We could inline lookup_commit() in
>> parse_commit_in_graph_one(), removing the object creation part, but that
>> adds complexity as well.)
> I was thinking we would only do so in the happy path when we find a
> commit. I.e., something like:
>
>    obj = lookup_object(oid); /* does not auto-vivify */
>    if (obj && obj->parsed)
> 	return obj;
>
>    if (we_have_it_in_commit_graph) {
> 	commit = obj || lookup_commit(oid);
> 	fill_in_details_from_commit_graph(commit);
> 	return &commit->obj;
>    } else {
> 	return parse_object(oid);
>    }
>
> which is more along the lines of that parse_probably_commit() that
> Stolee mentioned.

This approach is what I had in mind. Thanks for making it more concrete!

-Stolee