From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C570C433EF for ; Mon, 27 Dec 2021 07:09:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235449AbhL0HJL (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Dec 2021 02:09:11 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37216 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235447AbhL0HJK (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Dec 2021 02:09:10 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB1E7C06173E for ; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 23:09:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id j13so10856906plx.4 for ; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 23:09:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PoRGQoC9f+MUZLMgpMsaTB7WO0wk1QH1BI2MLQucJtE=; b=UtjqPyJpgB+I2BPNEEC9S2MrOVqm0zKwhxX7ez4NjygBa1Z6C/mldg8UjH5kvLsRfj cKD4YHDMpquVyS0u+aH2Q/RpZPobbeYf1sl/PjqMG3mPWt/mTHb/ZmlWrCWFJAj+e69V E229yaZAXrHE1JceZaH/YAYmNaUnCwCQvDXjthEJLl6nVRaMZ00BpNhO141+RykKas72 xoQYFDMA+d6uBSjxJtGnxgDitcgSpQrlNZtDdsVxKTcGvKXZ8Yb/aJ6vOh/CVqbwxYMZ DEm5RhdlWScrM7i74eaYTcUgT2FuCs8TevQP2D8972e+T/9uHeUWyjzILxw+pif0YCA8 +IKg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PoRGQoC9f+MUZLMgpMsaTB7WO0wk1QH1BI2MLQucJtE=; b=KxTUHzCwiEwb9oKpk4PaJbyZ663rhzmXU57wcaePcCeXJ1Q2yVlInQi7EEgAG7A6Xy Vhvpn+SQILN6Z3xxyVG/j297f5DOa7O9YZoM2fJctlzk5L/HgJwAY1S5HvkJrTqb8/6K uZrimI1I/mhEbYySCQfTeSJ3qU/VM6ZB79yoAPBXET7Y1X1oYpYVWlJJJFsyAc2qKTPO Dp+mRd/0zms+94RLLeKAwh0aTFRVmIjFclRmsfVk52pGNaHiY/MuJ+IjboMr1T5Ugqim HR/UJZV7gSQNwgz+vef61pNMVrnZkaJCJ9DHJjhJBQk+U+GjERLKtaSw2AG2Fn6BK5yF 29tg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532DHjMmSfBpr3bQQ9hV/UP7GVBtPxXgIv5rBCU3p/BNWYCo4p0n fvmkFB11mxaumg3z00qrO30= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwT+cGcBzvCBf6mR+OEssDmnB3LZyjc7etLYeoRRidXQy6nSwiancl+TttC7tUM6SP1/gL1NQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e541:b0:149:35bd:b260 with SMTP id n1-20020a170902e54100b0014935bdb260mr16111008plf.41.1640588950222; Sun, 26 Dec 2021 23:09:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([205.204.117.100]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o4sm15371531pfb.119.2021.12.26.23.09.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 26 Dec 2021 23:09:09 -0800 (PST) From: Teng Long To: avarab@gmail.com Cc: dyroneteng@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Dec 2021, #05; Thu, 23) Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2021 15:09:02 +0800 Message-Id: <20211227070902.4656-1-dyroneteng@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.33.1.11.ga38cbfc207.dirty In-Reply-To: <211226.8635mfgu7o.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> References: <211226.8635mfgu7o.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 18:15:53 +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > Yes there's the test problem I mentioned in [1], but in addition to that > your current set of patches have around a ~10% performance regression, > as noted in [2]. My RFC series[2] side-steps that by leaving the current > code in-place, and only introducing a new optional --format path for new > output formats. > > I really don't mind if you go for "WAY-1" first over my RFC --format > "WAY-2", but I do think any such change should be prominently > noting/selling that this new feature is worth the performance > regression, or finding some alternate "WAY-1+" to avoid it. Yes, I see what you mean, and what I'm trying to say is that we see eye to eye on this. As I mentioned above, the performace regression is compelling and I looked into it on the night before and already found out why the regression was produced (But I can not send patch over gmail at home because of the network, maybe i'd like to try with GitGitGadget next time). I will not omit this problem and go on working at it today, similarly, wouldn't reply this thread otherwise the new patchset is reach the standard (As I see the "cooking" is let others know what's new and the corresponding progress currently and discussions should still be made under the "patch"). Thanks.