From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [irq/urgent]: created 3786fc7: "irq: make variable static"
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:58:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081022095818.GA27711@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48FEF868.2010802@op5.se>
* Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:
>>
>>> I imagine you'd want to use it to find out which branches you can (or
>>> can't) merge, and in that case you need to know about all the topics
>>> which have the commit. Assuming you don't go crazy cherry-picking and
>>> criss-cross merging, it should only list a few. The output is not as
>>> fancy as below, but it should be faster than the appended script (by
>>> several orders of magnitude).
>>
>> i solved that particular problem quite well, based on suggestions in a
>> thread earlier on the git-list. I'm using git branch --no-merged:
>>
>> earth4:~/tip> time todo-merge-all
>> merging the following updated branches:
>> merging linus ... ... merge done.
>>
>> real 0m2.865s
>> user 0m2.580s
>> sys 0m0.228s
>>
>> that work step used to be over a minute! There are 233 topic branches
>> at the moment and 18 integration branches. Kudos for making this go
>> really fast in 1.6.0.
>>
>> the thing i'm after is to see the originator branch of changes. "git
>> name-rev" was suggested by Santi Béjar in this thread and that is
>> exactly what i need - i'll try to integrate it into some git-log-ish
>> output tool.
>>
>> One thing i noticed is that 'git name-rev' can be quite slow for
>> certain commits:
>>
>> earth4:~/tip> time git name-rev 948f984
>> 948f984 tags/tip-safe-poison-pointers-2008-05-26_08_52_Mon~1
>>
>> real 0m2.181s
>> user 0m2.068s
>> sys 0m0.092s
>>
>> Which seems natural since it might have to dive back into history and
>> cross-reference it to all names. (there's 400 branches and 450 tags in
>> this tree, so i'm certainly pushing things!)
>>
>> But if i use that in my git-log-line summary tool it might become
>> quadratic overhead (or worse) very quickly, with minutes of runtime.
>>
>
> What's the timing for "git branch --contains 948f984" ?
>
> "git name-rev" parses a lot more just to be able to print a pretty
> short-name (the reversed "git describe") for you to use.
it takes much longer:
earth4:~/tip> time git branch --contains 948f984
[... 44 branches ...]
real 0m9.596s
user 0m9.151s
sys 0m0.218s
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-22 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-22 6:17 [irq/urgent]: created 3786fc7: "irq: make variable static" Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 7:39 ` Santi Béjar
2008-10-22 7:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-26 16:04 ` René Scharfe
2008-10-22 8:34 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-10-22 9:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-22 9:54 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-10-22 9:58 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-10-22 10:50 ` Jakub Narebski
2008-10-22 13:21 ` Jeff King
2008-10-22 17:04 ` Johannes Schindelin
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=20081022095818.GA27711@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ae@op5.se \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.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 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).