All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, jonathantanmy@google.com,
	jrnieder@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] rev-list: exclude promisor objects at walk time
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:43:43 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqbm1f421c.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190409151559.GB12627@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:15:59 -0400")

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:14:41AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> I've dealt with the stray double-sign-off locally, but is there
>> anything else planned for v4 or later?  Is this performance-only
>> change, or does it have an externally observable behaviour change
>> that we can easily add to our test suite?
>
> I am OK if we do not include it, but even if this is "just" a
> performance-only change, we can always add to our perf regression suite.

Hmph, that does not say much about a possible change in behaviour in
corner cases you guys were discuussing near the beginning of the
thread when an object can be reached from both a non-promisor and a
promisor object, does it?

Shouldn't we at least tweak the log message to record that we were
aware of the possibility even though we couldn't readily come up
with a case where this optimization breaks things?  I suspect that
it would help the next person who needs to deal with a possible
regression coming from this change to understand the problem better
and hopefully faster.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-09 15:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-03 17:27 [PATCH] clone: do faster object check for partial clones Josh Steadmon
2019-04-03 18:58 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-04-03 19:41 ` Jeff King
2019-04-03 20:57   ` Jonathan Tan
2019-04-04  0:21     ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-04  1:33     ` Jeff King
2019-04-04 22:53 ` [PATCH v2] rev-list: exclude promisor objects at walk time Josh Steadmon
2019-04-04 23:08   ` Jeff King
2019-04-04 23:47     ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-05  0:00       ` Jeff King
2019-04-05  0:09         ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-08 20:59           ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-08 21:06 ` [PATCH v3] " Josh Steadmon
2019-04-08 22:23   ` Christian Couder
2019-04-08 23:12     ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-09 15:14   ` Junio C Hamano
2019-04-09 15:15     ` Jeff King
2019-04-09 15:43       ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2019-04-09 16:35         ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-09 18:04   ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-04-09 23:42     ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-11  4:06       ` Jeff King
2019-04-12 22:38         ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-13  5:34           ` Jeff King
2019-04-19 20:26             ` Josh Steadmon
2019-04-19 21:00 ` [PATCH v4] clone: do faster object check for partial clones Josh Steadmon
2019-04-22 21:31   ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqbm1f421c.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
    --cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=steadmon@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.