From: "Ben Lynn" <benlynn@gmail.com>
To: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
"Daniel Barkalow" <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: git bugs
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 10:52:32 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <832adb090806111052p32a750c2n5f2d43e0ed1b910d@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0806110752550.3101@woody.linux-foundation.org>
> I'm not sure why you think my patch that just did the zero-sized blob
> thing was slow? It's a 20-byte memcmp(). It takes no time at all.
I don't think the memcmp is slow. I think the ce_modified_check_fs in:
smudge() {
...
if (ce_match_stat_basic(ce, &st))
return;
if (ce_modified_check_fs(ce, &st))
ce->ce_size = 0;
}
is potentially slow, and I'm saying you could replace it with
smudge() {
...
if (ce_match_stat_basic(ce, &st))
return;
ce->ce_size = ~0;
}
to avoid the ce_modified_check_fs call. But it is an unclean solution,
which is why I champion having an extra flag per file.
Also, I think we could set ce->ce_size to ~0 when we first realize
timestamp = mtime, and we'd no longer have to do index-wide smudging
on writes.
Thanks for the explanation by the way. I get why you can't modify the
SHA1. It is indeed what we asked git to record, right or wrong. I got
confused because I misread the code and thought ce_modified_check_fs()
would write the new SHA1 to disk.
-Ben
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-11 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-10 8:41 git bugs Ben Lynn
2008-06-10 16:58 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-06-10 17:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-10 18:45 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-10 20:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-10 23:09 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-10 23:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-11 0:02 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 0:20 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-11 0:24 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 0:53 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 12:46 ` Stephen R. van den Berg
2008-06-12 6:51 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 1:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-11 2:04 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 2:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-11 2:31 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 2:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-11 5:58 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 6:18 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 14:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-11 17:52 ` Ben Lynn [this message]
2008-06-11 18:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-11 18:48 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 18:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-11 20:57 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-11 21:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-11 14:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-06-12 20:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-13 10:10 ` Jeff King
2008-06-13 23:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-14 6:25 ` Jeff King
2008-06-12 3:17 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-06-12 6:46 ` Ben Lynn
2008-06-12 7:12 ` Johannes Schindelin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-02-23 20:27 Sean Hunt
2017-02-24 16:52 ` Johannes Schindelin
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=832adb090806111052p32a750c2n5f2d43e0ed1b910d@mail.gmail.com \
--to=benlynn@gmail.com \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).