From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>, Chris Lee <clee@kde.org>,
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: git-index-pack really does suck..
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 17:03:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070403210319.GH27706@spearce.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704031346250.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Actually, even in the normal workflow it will do all the extra unnecessary
> work, if only because the lookup costs of *not* finding the entry.
>
> Lookie here:
>
> - git index-pack of the *git* pack-file in the v2.6/linux directory (zero
> overlap of objects)
>
> With --paranoid:
>
> 2.75user 0.37system 0:03.13elapsed 99%CPU
> 0major+5583minor pagefaults
>
> Without --paranoid:
>
> 2.55user 0.12system 0:02.68elapsed 99%CPU
> 0major+2957minor pagefaults
>
> See? That's the *normal* workflow. Zero objects found. 7% CPU overhead
> from just the unnecessary work, and almost twice as much memory used. Just
> from the index file lookup etc for a decent-sized project.
OK, but what about that case with unpack-objects? Didn't we there
do all this work to also check for the object already existing?
During update-index, write-tree and commit-tree don't we also do
a lot of work (per object anyway) to check for a non-existing object?
So even with --paranoid (aka what we have now) index-pack still
should be faster than unpack-objects for any sizeable transfer,
and is just as "safe".
If its the missing-object lookup that is expensive, maybe we should
try to optimize that. We do it enough already in other parts of
the code...
--
Shawn.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-03 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-03 15:15 git-index-pack really does suck Linus Torvalds
[not found] ` <db 69205d0704031227q1009eabfhdd82aa3636f25bb6@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.64.07 04031304420.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.64.0704031322490.67 30@woody.linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <Pi ne.LNX.4.64.0704031413200.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org>
[not found] ` <alpine.LFD.0.98. 0704031836350.28181@xanadu.home>
2007-04-03 16:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 16:40 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 16:33 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 19:27 ` Chris Lee
2007-04-03 19:49 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 19:54 ` Chris Lee
2007-04-03 20:18 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 20:32 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 20:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-03 21:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 21:28 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 22:49 ` Chris Lee
2007-04-03 23:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 21:03 ` Shawn O. Pearce [this message]
2007-04-03 21:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 21:17 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-03 21:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 21:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 22:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-03 22:38 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-03 22:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-05 10:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] git-fetch--tool pick-rref Junio C Hamano
2007-04-05 10:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] git-fetch: use fetch--tool pick-rref to avoid local fetch from alternate Junio C Hamano
2007-04-05 16:15 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-05 21:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-03 21:34 ` git-index-pack really does suck Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 21:37 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-03 21:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-03 21:53 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-03 22:10 ` Jeff King
2007-04-03 22:40 ` Dana How
2007-04-03 22:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 22:31 ` David Lang
2007-04-03 23:00 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 21:21 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 20:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 21:05 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 21:11 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-03 21:24 ` Linus Torvalds
[not found] ` <alpine.LF D.0.98.0704031735470.28181@xanadu.home>
2007-04-03 21:42 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 22:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-03 22:11 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2007-04-03 22:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 22:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 22:55 ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-04-03 22:36 ` David Lang
2007-04-04 9:51 ` Alex Riesen
[not found] ` <P ine.LNX.4.63.0704061455380.24050@qynat.qvtvafvgr.pbz>
2007-04-06 21:56 ` David Lang
2007-04-06 22:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-06 22:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-06 22:22 ` David Lang
2007-04-06 22:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-06 22:28 ` David Lang
2007-04-03 23:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-04-03 20:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2007-04-03 20:53 ` Nicolas Pitre
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=20070403210319.GH27706@spearce.org \
--to=spearce@spearce.org \
--cc=clee@kde.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=junkio@cox.net \
--cc=nico@cam.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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.