From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com>
Cc: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, trast@student.ethz.ch, mhagger@alum.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [GSoC] Designing a faster index format - Progress report
Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 02:27:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vbolaotwj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120527090407.GD86874@tgummerer> (Thomas Gummerer's message of "Sun, 27 May 2012 11:04:07 +0200")
Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> writes:
>> No, read_index_from would go through the normal tree->list conversion.
>> What I'd like to see is what it looks like when a command accesses
>> index v5 directly in tree form, taking all advantages that tree-form
>> provides, and how we should deal with old index versions while still
>> supporting index v5 (without losing tree advantages)
>
> Ah ok, thanks for the clarification, I understand what you meant now.
> I think however, that it's not very beneficial to do this conversion
> now. git ls-files needs the whole index file anyway, so it's probably
> not a very good test.
Think about "git ls-files t/" and "git ls-files -u".
The former obviously does *not* have to look at the whole thing, even
though the current code assumes the in-core data structure that has the
whole thing in a flat array. IIRC, you had unmerged entries tucked at the
end outside the main index data, so the latter is also an interesting
demonstration of how wonderful the new data format could be.
Unlike other commands like status and diff that may need to look at things
other than the index, the core functionalitly of ls-files is purely about
the index. I do not understand why you think it is not a good test case.
If an updated index structure cannot even improve ls-files, there is no
hope it can improve other more complex commands that need to walk the
index and something else in parallel.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-27 9:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-23 12:21 [GSoC] Designing a faster index format - Progress report Thomas Gummerer
2012-05-24 20:01 ` Thomas Rast
2012-05-24 20:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-05-25 11:31 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-05-25 20:15 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-05-26 4:09 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-05-27 9:04 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-05-27 9:27 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2012-05-27 12:23 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-05-28 8:26 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-05-29 13:29 ` Thomas Rast
2012-05-29 13:43 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-05-29 18:33 ` Junio C Hamano
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=7vbolaotwj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=t.gummerer@gmail.com \
--cc=trast@student.ethz.ch \
/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).