From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Haggerty Subject: Re: Git is not scalable with too many refs/* Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:08:23 +0200 Message-ID: <4E8ABEF7.7010003@alum.mit.edu> References: <4DF6A8B6.9030301@op5.se> <201109301041.13848.mfick@codeaurora.org> <201109301502.30617.mfick@codeaurora.org> <201109301606.31748.mfick@codeaurora.org> <7vwrcola0m.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <4E87F462.3000308@alum.mit.edu> <3e4aa1b3-5b14-4446-ac83-cef41c18a11f@email.android.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Christian Couder , Thomas Rast , =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgU2NoYXJmZQ==?= , Julian Phillips To: Martin Fick X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 04 10:08:46 2011 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 1RB03S-0005S1-5S for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2011 10:08:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753227Ab1JDIIm (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Oct 2011 04:08:42 -0400 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:41564 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751261Ab1JDIIk (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Oct 2011 04:08:40 -0400 X-Envelope-From: mhagger@alum.mit.edu Received: from [192.168.100.152] (ssh.berlin.jpk.com [212.222.128.135]) (authenticated bits=0) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id p9488ND6026132 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 4 Oct 2011 10:08:23 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110921 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.15 In-Reply-To: <3e4aa1b3-5b14-4446-ac83-cef41c18a11f@email.android.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 10/03/2011 02:46 AM, Martin Fick wrote: > Michael Haggerty wrote: >> I >> also have some code (not pushed) that adds some intelligence to make >> the use case >> >> repeat many times: >> check if reference exists >> add reference > > Would it be possible to separate the two steps into separate loops somehow? Could it instead look like this: > >> repeat many times: >> check if reference exists > >> repeat many times: >> add reference Undoubtedly this would be possible. But I'd rather make the refs code efficient and general enough that its users don't need to worry about such things. > [...] Of course, this would likely require checking for dups > before running the first loop. Yes, and this "checking for dups before running the first loop" is approximately the same work that would have to be done within a smarter version of the refs code. Michael -- Michael Haggerty mhagger@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/