From: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com>,
Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com>, <git@vger.kernel.org>,
<mhagger@alum.mit.edu>, <pclouds@gmail.com>,
<trast@student.ethz.ch>,
JGit Developers list <jgit-dev@eclipse.org>
Subject: Re: [GSoC] Designing a faster index format - Progress report week 13
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 21:43:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87629fvaxz.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vfw8jsk5o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Sun, 22 Jul 2012 11:52:35 -0700")
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com> writes:
>
>> A note on how JGit would work here. Java has none of the fields
>> that constitute statcrc. I guess we would write zero here when
>> creating new entries. Git could recognize that when checking status
>> and simply assume "clean" unless mtime or st_size says otherwise.
>
> Even though it may not be the end of the world, that is certainly
> bad. Recording the constituent fields separately without the statcrc
> microoptimization, thereby not shaving a handful of bytes per the
> index entry, is not the end of the world either in the same sense,
> which leads us to question the benefit we would be getting from such
> a change.
Hum, I'm a bit lost now.
What is the status quo? I take it JGit does not have any of ctime, dev,
ino etc., and either leaves the existing value or puts a 0. Which is
not different from either leaving the stat crc in place, or putting a 0.
Except that IIUC, putting a 0 in both cases means forcing a refresh once
C git comes along (or some other reader that knows about the fields).
So if we want to keep the safety net, a magic "I don't know" value would
indeed be a good idea. But I don't see how what Robin said constitutes
an argument in favor of splitting stat_crc into its fields again?
--
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-22 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-16 20:33 [GSoC] Designing a faster index format - Progress report week 13 Thomas Gummerer
2012-07-16 20:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-07-17 8:21 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-07-17 8:24 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-07-22 15:22 ` Robin Rosenberg
2012-07-22 18:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-07-22 19:43 ` Thomas Rast [this message]
2012-07-22 21:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-07-23 22:29 ` Robin Rosenberg
2012-07-24 11:54 ` Thomas Rast
2012-07-24 16:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-07-25 6:44 ` Thomas Rast
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=87629fvaxz.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch \
--to=trast@student.ethz.ch \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jgit-dev@eclipse.org \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=robin.rosenberg@dewire.com \
--cc=t.gummerer@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).