From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>, phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] t3429: try to protect against a potential racy todo file problem
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:43:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5a43a071-a3c2-770e-bca4-3e73aff96e48@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191125131833.GD23183@szeder.dev>
On 25/11/2019 13:18, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 10:10:21PM +0100, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
>> To notice a changed todo file the sequencer stores the file's stat
>> data in its 'struct todo_list' instance, and compares it with the
>> file's current stat data after 'reword', 'squash' and 'exec'
>> instructions. If the two stat data doesn't match, it re-reads the
>> todo file.
>>
>> Sounds simple, but there are some subtleties going on here:
>>
>> - The 'struct todo_list' holds the stat data from the time when the
>> todo file was last read.
>>
>> - This stat data in 'struct todo_list' is not updated when the
>> sequencer itself writes the todo file.
>>
>> - Before executing each instruction during an interactive rebase,
>> the sequencer always updates the todo file by removing the
>> just-about-to-be-executed instruction. This changes the file's
>> size and inode [1].
>>
>> Consequently, when the sequencer looks at the stat data after a
>> 'reword', 'squash' or 'exec' instruction, it most likely finds that
>> they differ, even when the user didn't modify the todo list at all!
>> This is not an issue in practice, it just wastes a few cycles on
>> re-reading the todo list that matches what the sequencer already has
>> in memory anyway.
>
> It can be much more than just a few cycles, because the total number
> of parsed instructions from all the todo file re-reads can go
> quadratic with the number of rebased commits.
>
> The simple test below runs 'git rebase -i -x' on 1000 commits, which
> takes over 14seconds to run. If it doesn't re-read the todo file at
> all (I simply deleted the whole condition block checking the stat data
> and re-reading) it runs for only ~2.5secs.
>
> Just another angle to consider...
I know dscho was keen to avoid re-parsing the list all the time [1]
presumably because of the quadratic behavior. (He also assumed most
people were using ns stat times [2] but that appears not to be the case)
Could we just compare the text of the todo list on disk to whats in
todo->buf.buf (with an appropriate offset)? That would avoid parsing the
text and looking up all the commits with get_oid()
Best Wishes
Phillip
[1]
https://public-inbox.org/git/alpine.DEB.2.20.1703021617510.3767@virtualbox/
[2]
https://public-inbox.org/git/alpine.DEB.2.20.1704131526500.2135@virtualbox/
>
> --- >8 ---
>
> test_expect_success 'test' '
> num_commits=1000 &&
> test_commit_bulk --filename=file $num_commits &&
>
> /usr/bin/time -f "Elapsed time: %e" \
> git rebase -i --root -x true 2>out &&
>
> grep "Executing: true" out >actual &&
> test_line_count = $num_commits actual &&
>
> # show the elapsed time
> tail -n2 out
> '
>
> --- >8 ---
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-25 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-22 23:10 git 2.24: git revert <commit1> <commit2> requires extra '--continue'? Brian Norris
2019-11-23 0:34 ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-23 9:53 ` Phillip Wood
2019-11-23 17:20 ` [PATCH] sequencer: don't re-read todo for revert and cherry-pick SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-23 21:14 ` Johannes Schindelin
2019-11-24 4:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-24 10:44 ` Phillip Wood
2019-11-24 21:10 ` [PATCH] t3429: try to protect against a potential racy todo file problem SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-25 1:28 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-25 3:10 ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-25 13:18 ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-25 14:43 ` Phillip Wood [this message]
2019-11-25 15:15 ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-25 16:40 ` Phillip Wood
2019-11-25 1:10 ` [PATCH] sequencer: don't re-read todo for revert and cherry-pick Junio C Hamano
2019-11-25 10:47 ` Phillip Wood
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=5a43a071-a3c2-770e-bca4-3e73aff96e48@gmail.com \
--to=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
--cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
/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).