git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: git <git@vger.kernel.org>, Ben Peart <benpeart@microsoft.com>,
	Alex Vandiver <alexmv@dropbox.com>,
	Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	David Turner <dturner@twopensource.com>,
	pclouds@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Some rough edges of core.fsmonitor
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 11:12:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee8f571e-a4cc-e8d4-b490-072e1579ee65@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87vafjlyyp.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>



On 1/30/2018 6:16 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 30 2018, Ben Peart jotted:
> 
>> While some of these issues have been discussed in other threads, I
>> thought I'd summarize my thoughts here.
> 
> Thanks for this & your other reply. I'm going to get to testing some of
> Duy's patches soon, and if you have some other relevant WIP I'd be happy
> to try them, but meanwhile replying to a few of these:
> 
>> On 1/26/2018 7:28 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>> I just got around to testing this since it landed, for context some
>>> previous poking of mine in [1].
>>>
>>> Issues / stuff I've noticed:
>>>
>>> 1) We end up invalidating the untracked cache because stuff in .git/
>>> changed. For example:
>>>
>>>       01:09:24.975524 fsmonitor.c:173         fsmonitor process '.git/hooks/fsmonitor-watchman' returned success
>>>       01:09:24.975548 fsmonitor.c:138         fsmonitor_refresh_callback '.git'
>>>       01:09:24.975556 fsmonitor.c:138         fsmonitor_refresh_callback '.git/config'
>>>       01:09:24.975568 fsmonitor.c:138         fsmonitor_refresh_callback '.git/index'
>>>       01:09:25.122726 fsmonitor.c:91          write fsmonitor extension successful
>>>
>>> Am I missing something or should we do something like:
>>>
>>>       diff --git a/fsmonitor.c b/fsmonitor.c
>>>       index 0af7c4edba..5067b89bda 100644
>>>       --- a/fsmonitor.c
>>>       +++ b/fsmonitor.c
>>>       @@ -118,7 +118,12 @@ static int query_fsmonitor(int version, uint64_t last_update, struct strbuf *que
>>>
>>>        static void fsmonitor_refresh_callback(struct index_state *istate, const char *name)
>>>        {
>>>       -       int pos = index_name_pos(istate, name, strlen(name));
>>>       +       int pos;
>>>       +
>>>       +       if (!strcmp(name, ".git") || starts_with(name, ".git/"))
>>>       +               return;
>>>       +
>>>       +       pos = index_name_pos(istate, name, strlen(name));
>>>
>>>               if (pos >= 0) {
>>>                       struct cache_entry *ce = istate->cache[pos];
>>>
>>> With that patch applied status on a large repo[2] goes from a consistent
>>> ~180-200ms to ~140-150ms, since we're not invalidating some of the UC
>>> structure
>>>
>>
>> I favor making this optimization by updating
>> untracked_cache_invalidate_path() so that it ignores paths under
>> get_git_dir() and doesn't invalidate the untracked cache or flag the
>> index as dirty.
> 
> *nod*
> 
>>> 2) We re-write out the index even though we know nothing changed
>>>
>>> When you first run with core.fsmonitor it needs to
>>> mark_fsmonitor_clean() for every path, but is there a reason for why we
>>> wouldn't supply the equivalent of GIT_OPTIONAL_LOCKS=0 if all paths are
>>> marked and we know from the hook that nothing changed? Why write out the
>>> index again?
>>>
>>
>> Writing out the index when core.fsmonitor is first turned on is
>> necessary to get the index extension added with the current state of
>> the dirty flags.  Given it is a one time cost, I don't think we have
>> anything worth trying to optimize here.
> 
> Indeed, that makes sense. What I was showing here is even after the
> initial setup we continue to write it out when we know nothing changed.
> 
> We do that anyway without fsmonitor, but this seemed like a worthwhile
> thing to optimize.
> 

There is already logic to avoid writing out the index unless there is 
something that requires it.  In my testing, it was often the untracked 
cache marking the index as dirty that was causing the unexpected writes.

The patch to make the untracked cache only flag the index as dirty when 
the feature is being turned on or off is pretty simple (see below).  The 
challenge was that many of the untracked cache tests assume all changes 
are saved to disk after every command so they fail after making this 
change.  The patch below does a simple hack of checking for a test 
environment variable and only forcing the index writes if it is set.

Internally, we simply turned off the untracked cache as it's usefulness 
in combination with GVFS is limited and without the patch, it actually 
slowed down common operations more than it sped them up.

Typically, changes to the untracked cache don't accumulate long before 
the user does some operation that requires the index to be written out 
at which point the untracked cache is updated as well.


diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c
index 5e93a1350b..af1d33aae1 100644
--- a/dir.c
+++ b/dir.c
@@ -2256,7 +2256,8 @@ int read_directory(struct dir_struct *dir, struct 
index_state *istate,
                                  dir->untracked->gitignore_invalidated,
                                  dir->untracked->dir_invalidated,
                                  dir->untracked->dir_opened);
-               if (dir->untracked == istate->untracked &&
+               if (getenv("GIT_TEST_UNTRACKED_CACHE") &&
+                       dir->untracked == istate->untracked &&
                     (dir->untracked->dir_opened ||
                      dir->untracked->gitignore_invalidated ||
                      dir->untracked->dir_invalidated))
diff --git a/t/t7063-status-untracked-cache.sh 
b/t/t7063-status-untracked-cache.sh
index ea9383e8cb..e5811b6ef2 100755
--- a/t/t7063-status-untracked-cache.sh
+++ b/t/t7063-status-untracked-cache.sh
@@ -14,6 +14,8 @@ test_description='test untracked cache'
  # See <20160803174522.5571-1-pclouds@gmail.com> if you want to know
  # more.

+export GIT_TEST_UNTRACKED_CACHE=true
+
  sync_mtime () {
         if test_have_prereq BUSYBOX
         then



      reply	other threads:[~2018-01-31 16:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-27  0:28 Some rough edges of core.fsmonitor Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-01-27  1:36 ` Duy Nguyen
2018-01-27  1:39   ` [PATCH] trace: measure where the time is spent in the index-heavy operations Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-01-27 11:58     ` Thomas Gummerer
2018-01-27 12:27       ` [PATCH v2] " Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-01-27 11:43   ` Some rough edges of core.fsmonitor Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-01-27 12:39     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-01-27 13:09       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-01-27 19:01         ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-01-30 22:41           ` Ben Peart
2018-01-29  9:40     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-01-29 23:16       ` Ben Peart
2018-02-01 10:40         ` Duy Nguyen
2018-01-28 20:44 ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-01-28 22:28   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-01-30  1:21     ` Ben Peart
2018-01-31 10:15       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-02-04  9:38         ` [PATCH] dir.c: ignore paths containing .git when invalidating untracked cache Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-02-05 17:44           ` Ben Peart
2018-02-06 12:02             ` Duy Nguyen
2018-02-07  9:21           ` [PATCH v2] " Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-02-07  9:21             ` Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-02-07 16:59               ` Ben Peart
2018-02-13 10:00                 ` Duy Nguyen
2018-02-13 17:57                   ` Junio C Hamano
2018-02-14  1:24                     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-02-14  8:00                       ` Junio C Hamano
2018-01-30 22:57 ` Some rough edges of core.fsmonitor Ben Peart
2018-01-30 23:16   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-01-31 16:12     ` Ben Peart [this message]

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=ee8f571e-a4cc-e8d4-b490-072e1579ee65@gmail.com \
    --to=peartben@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexmv@dropbox.com \
    --cc=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=benpeart@microsoft.com \
    --cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
    --cc=dturner@twopensource.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pclouds@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).