From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, emilyshaffer@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fetch: delay fetch_if_missing=0 until after config
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 11:38:00 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqv9sdeeif.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191024191804.57275-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Thu, 24 Oct 2019 12:18:04 -0700")
Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes:
> To me, this is moving a band-aid, not adding another one. But to the
Fair enough.
> Sifting calls into two categories might work, but it's error-prone in
> that we would have to do the same line-by-line analysis we did when we
> added the repository argument to many functions, and we would have to
> modify functions like parse_commit() to take a flag similar to
> OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT. Also, we would have to do the same
> careful inspection for future patches.
Absolutely. That is the price to pay for the lazy-fetch feature.
> Instead, we can control whether a region of code lazy-fetches...
The approach "from here to there, we can set global to forbid
lazy-fetch" may prolong the life support of the quick-and-dirty
mechanism, but it has to assume you can say "from here to there"; it
would mean that we cannot go multi-threaded until we get off of it.
That is why I said it may be time for us to wean us off of the
quick-and-dirty hack that helped us bootstrapping the initial
implementation of lazy clone.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-25 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-07 18:18 [PATCH] fetch: delay fetch_if_missing=0 until after config Jonathan Tan
2019-10-23 21:03 ` Emily Shaffer
2019-10-23 21:44 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Tan
2019-10-23 23:30 ` Emily Shaffer
2019-10-23 23:34 ` [PATCH v3] " Jonathan Tan
2019-10-24 4:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 19:18 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-10-25 2:38 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2019-10-25 17:41 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-10-29 1:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-01 20:43 ` Jonathan Tan
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=xmqqv9sdeeif.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=emilyshaffer@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathantanmy@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 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).