Re: RFC: New reference iteration paradigm
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Mar 31, 2016, 20:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqa8lemmui.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160331193150.GC5013@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 35 quoted lines
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:01:44AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
>>
>> > the backend now has to implement
>> >
>> >> struct ref_iterator *ref_iterator_begin_fn(const char *submodule,
>> >> const char *prefix,
>> >> unsigned int flags);
>> >
>> > The ref_iterator itself has to implement two main methods:
>> >
>> >> int iterator_advance_fn(struct ref_iterator *ref_iterator);
>> >> void iterator_free_fn(struct ref_iterator *ref_iterator);
>> >
>> > A loop over references now looks something like
>> >
>> >> struct ref_iterator *iter = each_ref_in_iterator("refs/tags/");
>> >> while (ref_iterator_advance(iter)) {
>> >> /* code using iter->refname, iter->oid, iter->flags */
>> >> }
>>
>> We'd want to take advantage of the tree-like organization of the
>> refs (i.e. refs/tags/a and refs/tags/b sit next to each other and
>> they are closer to each other than they are to refs/heads/a) so that
>> a request "I want to iterate only over tags, even though I may have
>> millions of other kinds of refs" can be done with cost that is
>> proportional to how many tags you have.
>>
>> The current implementation of for_each_tag_ref() that goes down to
>> do_for_each_entry() in files-backend.c has that propertly, and the
>> new iteration mechanism with the above design seems to keep it,
>> which is very nice.
>
> Actually, that is a slight fiction. :)I know. My first draft had "(at least for the loose ref side)" there, but I omitted it for brevity.
Show 6 quoted lines
> We traverse only the loose ref directories we need, but we populate the > entire packed-refs tree in one go. > ... > 800MB packed-refs file, as looking up one tiny subset of the entries > wastes a lot of RAM and CPU pulling that into our internal > representation[1].
Yes, that is an important use case that needs to be kept in mind for any restructure of this machinery.