From: Mitchel Humpherys <mitch.special@gmail.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: jonas@bernoul.li
Subject: Why is --graph --max-count=n so much slower than --graph HEAD~n..?
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:17:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vnkwd2f8ayea.fsf@mitchelh-linux.qualcomm.com> (raw)
I've noticed that --max-count doesn't seem to speed up `git log --graph'
computation time. Here are some numbers using the linux kernel
repository:
| command | time* |
|----------------------------------+-------|
| git log --graph --max-count=5000 | 4.11s |
| git log --graph --max-count=1000 | 4.05s |
| git log --graph --max-count=500 | 3.95s |
| git log --graph --max-count=50 | 3.95s |
| git log --graph --max-count=10 | 3.97s |
| git log --graph --max-count=1 | 3.96s |
However, specifying a manual revision range results in a much more
dramatic speedup as `n' decreases:
| command | time* |
|----------------------------------+-------|
| git log --graph HEAD~5000.. | 6.69s |
| git log --graph HEAD~1000.. | 1.89s |
| git log --graph HEAD~500.. | 0.03s |
| git log --graph HEAD~50.. | 0.02s |
| git log --graph HEAD~10.. | 0.02s |
| git log --graph HEAD~1.. | 0.00s |
* All times are "steady state" measurements after warming up the disk
cache by running the command a few times.
I see that the manual revision range doesn't seem to go back as far in
history when I diff the output of the two commands. However, if I add
`--max-count=50' to the `HEAD~50..' command I get the exact same commits
but with fewer "dangling" lines at the bottom of the graph in the
`HEAD~50..' approach.
Anyone care to provide any insight about what's going on here? Is this
expected behavior? Is there any low-hanging fruit for optimizing
--max-count --graph?
--
Mitch
next reply other threads:[~2014-05-20 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-20 22:17 Mitchel Humpherys [this message]
2014-05-20 22:50 ` Why is --graph --max-count=n so much slower than --graph HEAD~n..? Junio C Hamano
2014-05-21 0:13 ` Mitchel Humpherys
2014-05-21 0:24 ` Junio C Hamano
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=vnkwd2f8ayea.fsf@mitchelh-linux.qualcomm.com \
--to=mitch.special@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonas@bernoul.li \
/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.