From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E80331F6DC for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 19:00:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752380AbdAYTAq (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:00:46 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:59364 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752299AbdAYTAp (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:00:45 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A6F6320C; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:00:44 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=XdvLlqxaxyzg9LT1h96XR4/6XXk=; b=sl0iN9 FfRRtmtRABfQmDwEnTQ5RnpXfZdxk2lTYv6UhcgQGo865WCJ7H/s8j/mhflwf0ot tJOz4s6KLyFLmEHm9fca1EJIudMjFdturJp6A+zlSWXpgbY9HeZedLJbhsvk4Sq4 aud2eGwvOosMS4JM1PkhsECLeI+guHxrfPLLA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=wRqAJhw/jor0zGyc3nnx5C5vzfr8DdeE 6CLveaH5U+2Bg9vUBsX+iwof8VZn9/XcY/I+n8l5H/isL1OYyKUVApc/7dqseYJK zcNvUWaAipF8t44NFo8W7OjSEr2Ng+y4NPsDo+wM23YKT8lS2OoL+eMnvV02hgf0 mJcopIQsxVQ= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89AE96320B; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:00:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E72CA6320A; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 14:00:43 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] for_each_alternate_ref: replace transport code with for-each-ref References: <20170124003729.j4ygjcgypdq7hceg@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170124004409.py4eggvrtrej2bgi@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 11:00:42 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20170124004409.py4eggvrtrej2bgi@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 23 Jan 2017 19:44:09 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 92A5D5AA-E330-11E6-AED9-FE3F13518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > ... > This patch omits the peeled information from > for_each_alternate_ref entirely, and leaves it up to the > caller whether they want to dig up the information. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King > --- > I also tried adding "%(*objectname)" to for-each-ref to just > grab the peeled information, but the peel implementation in > ref-filter is _really_ slow. It doesn't use the packed-ref > peel information, and it doesn't recognize duplicates (so in > the 80 million case, it really parses 80 million tags). That's an interesting tangent that may want to be looked into. > transport.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) The updated code is a more pleasant read.