From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/3] faster inexact rename handling Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 01:29:22 -0700 Message-ID: <7vlk9lm2e5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20071030042118.GA14729@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Andy C To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 30 09:30:00 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1ImmTx-0001eS-6R for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 09:29:53 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751276AbXJ3I3d (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:29:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751262AbXJ3I3c (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:29:32 -0400 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:45574 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751198AbXJ3I3b (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:29:31 -0400 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6392F0; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:29:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BB798E67B; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 04:29:47 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds writes: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2007, Jeff King wrote: >> >> - no improvement on smaller datasets. Running "git-whatchanged -M >> --raw -l0" on the linux-2.6 repo takes about the same time with the >> old and new code (presumably the algorithmic savings of the new code >> are lost in a higher constant factor, so when n is small, it is a >> wash). > > Have you compared the results? IOW, does it find the *same* renames? > > I'm a bit worried about the fact that you just pick a single (arbitrary) > src/dst per fingerprint. Yes, it should be limited, but that seems to be a > bit too *extremely* limited. But if it gives the same results in practice, > maybe nobody cares? If it always gives the same results in practice, obviously nobody can even notice. However, merging this series to 'pu' breaks rebase-merge test t3402 among other things.