All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Toon Claes <toon@iotcl.com>
To: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: jltobler@gmail.com, ps@pks.im, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] bundle: fix non-linear performance scaling with refs
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 10:57:29 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <871pu0fl6u.fsf@iotcl.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250408-488-generating-bundles-with-many-references-has-non-linear-performance-v2-2-0802fc36a23d@gmail.com>

Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:

> The 'git bundle create' command has non-linear performance with the
> number of refs in the repository. Benchmarking the command shows that
> a large portion of the time (~75%) is spent in the
> `object_array_remove_duplicates()` function.
>
> The `object_array_remove_duplicates()` function was added in
> b2a6d1c686 (bundle: allow the same ref to be given more than once,
> 2009-01-17) to skip duplicate refs provided by the user from being
> written to the bundle. Since this is an O(N^2) algorithm, in repos with
> large number of references, this can take up a large amount of time.
>
> Let's instead use a 'strset' to skip duplicates inside
> `write_bundle_refs()`. This improves the performance by around 6 times
> when tested against in repository with 100000 refs:
>
> Benchmark 1: bundle (refcount = 100000, revision = master)
>   Time (mean ± σ):     14.653 s ±  0.203 s    [User: 13.940 s, System: 0.762 s]
>   Range (min … max):   14.237 s … 14.920 s    10 runs
>
> Benchmark 2: bundle (refcount = 100000, revision = HEAD)
>   Time (mean ± σ):      2.394 s ±  0.023 s    [User: 1.684 s, System: 0.798 s]
>   Range (min … max):    2.364 s …  2.425 s    10 runs
>
> Summary
>   bundle (refcount = 100000, revision = HEAD) ran
>     6.12 ± 0.10 times faster than bundle (refcount = 100000, revision = master)

I've done some benchmarking with some "real life" repositories, which
only have a couple of thousand refs and there the difference
(expectedly) barely noticable. Which is good to know there also isn't
any regression.

This version looks good to me, I approve.

--
Toon

  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-10  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-01 17:00 [PATCH 0/2] bundle: fix non-linear performance scaling with refs Karthik Nayak
2025-04-01 17:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] t6020: test for duplicate refnames in bundle creation Karthik Nayak
2025-04-01 17:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] bundle: fix non-linear performance scaling with refs Karthik Nayak
2025-04-03 19:07   ` Toon Claes
2025-04-06 20:48     ` Karthik Nayak
2025-04-08  9:00 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Karthik Nayak
2025-04-08  9:00   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] t6020: test for duplicate refnames in bundle creation Karthik Nayak
2025-04-08  9:00   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] bundle: fix non-linear performance scaling with refs Karthik Nayak
2025-04-10  8:57     ` Toon Claes [this message]
2025-04-10  9:04       ` Karthik Nayak

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=871pu0fl6u.fsf@iotcl.com \
    --to=toon@iotcl.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jltobler@gmail.com \
    --cc=karthik.188@gmail.com \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /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.