From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgU2NoYXJmZQ==?= Subject: Re: git diff too slow for a file Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:15:47 +0200 Message-ID: <4BCE1983.4020009@lsrfire.ath.cx> References: <4BB00573.6040005@gmail.com> <4BC9D928.50909@lsrfire.ath.cx> <7vpr1y2eev.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4BCB48E5.9090303@lsrfire.ath.cx> <7vd3xuinbe.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: SungHyun Nam , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 20 23:16:01 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O4KnX-0007tv-TB for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:16:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755308Ab0DTVPz convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:15:55 -0400 Received: from india601.server4you.de ([85.25.151.105]:55321 "EHLO india601.server4you.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755260Ab0DTVPy (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:15:54 -0400 Received: from [10.0.1.100] (p57B7F4C7.dip.t-dialin.net [87.183.244.199]) by india601.server4you.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D9F52F805A; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:15:52 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; de; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: <7vd3xuinbe.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 20.04.2010 09:40, schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Ren=C3=A9 Scharfe writes: >=20 >> For Linux, these 161 out of 178107 commits are affected: >> >> 90d49b4f 83f3c715 3b5dd52a e97bd974 4e092d11 96b3c83d 4c96e8= 93 >> ... >> 22e2c507 e9edcee0 303b86d9 47b5d69c 2d7edb92 cb624029 f4f051= eb >> >> I have briefly looked at a few of them. They were big and not obvio= us >> with or without XDF_NEED_MINIMAL, but the flag clearly helped to cut >> them down a bit. >=20 > Thanks. >=20 > I am getting the same impression after staring some output. >=20 > Probably we should at least try to get rid of the use of MINIMAL > immediately after 1.7.1 and if nobody finds large discrepancies, aim = to > ship 1.7.2 (and possibly 1.7.1.1) without even --quick/--slow options= =2E Turning XDF_NEED_MINIMAL off by default looks like the sane thing to do in order to help the fringe cases without hurting the normal ones. A --slow/--minimal/--try-harder option for git diff could come in handy for longer patches, though. GNU diff has it, too (-d/--minimal). > I expect that there will also be some differences in the blame output= =2E I haven't looked at the impact on blame, but additionally patch IDs are going to change (for those patches where XDF_NEED_MINIMAL makes a difference). Are they stored somewhere? Do we need to worry about the= m? Ren=C3=A9