From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 08/12] Teach the notes lookup code to parse notes trees with various fanout schemes Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:00 -0400 Message-ID: <20090827233900.GA7347@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <1251337437-16947-1-git-send-email-johan@herland.net> <20090827212710.GV1033@spearce.org> <7vy6p5ncz0.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <200908280103.06015.johan@herland.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , "Shawn O. Pearce" , Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, trast@student.ethz.ch, tavestbo@trolltech.com, git@drmicha.warpmail.net, chriscool@tuxfamily.org To: Johan Herland X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 28 01:39:11 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MgoYh-0000S7-4r for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Aug 2009 01:39:11 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752432AbZH0XjD (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752196AbZH0XjB (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:01 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:55636 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752146AbZH0XjB (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:01 -0400 Received: (qmail 1606 invoked by uid 107); 27 Aug 2009 23:39:11 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:11 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:39:00 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200908280103.06015.johan@herland.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 01:03:05AM +0200, Johan Herland wrote: > Agreed. I'm starting to come around to the idea of storing them in subtrees > based on commit dates. For one, you don't have multiple notes for one commit > in the same notes tree. Also, the common-case access pattern seems tempting. > > Dscho: Were there other problems with the date-based approach other than not > supporting notes on trees and blobs? > > If not, I'll start preparing another series with the date-based approach. Would you ever want to load a note for a commit when you did not have that commit present (in which case you would not know its date)? -Peff