From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 17:46:59 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/14] cache-tree: use ODB transaction around writing a tree Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <83fa4a5f3a5c79fa814932c0705867ff16a584c7.1648616734.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> "Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget" writes: > From: Neeraj Singh > > Take advantage of the odb transaction infrastructure around writing the > cached tree to the object database. > > Signed-off-by: Neeraj Singh > --- > cache-tree.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/cache-tree.c b/cache-tree.c > index 6752f69d515..8c5e8822716 100644 > --- a/cache-tree.c > +++ b/cache-tree.c > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ > #include "tree.h" > #include "tree-walk.h" > #include "cache-tree.h" > +#include "bulk-checkin.h" > #include "object-store.h" > #include "replace-object.h" > #include "promisor-remote.h" > @@ -474,8 +475,10 @@ int cache_tree_update(struct index_state *istate, int flags) > > trace_performance_enter(); > trace2_region_enter("cache_tree", "update", the_repository); There is no I/O in update_one() when the WRITE_TREE_DRY_RUN bit is set, so we _could_ optimize the begin/end away with if (!(flags & WRITE_TREE_DRY_RUN)) begin_odb_transaction() > + begin_odb_transaction(); > i = update_one(istate->cache_tree, istate->cache, istate->cache_nr, > "", 0, &skip, flags); > + end_odb_transaction(); > trace2_region_leave("cache_tree", "update", the_repository); > trace_performance_leave("cache_tree_update"); > if (i < 0) I do not know if that is worth it. If we do not do any object creation inside begin/end, we don't even create the temporary object directory and there is nothing we need to do when we "unplug". So this would be fine as-is, but I may be overlooking something, so I thought I'd mention it for completeness. Thanks.