Re: logging disjoint sets of commits in a single command

["Bryan O'Sullivan" <bryano@fb.com>]

On 2012-01-31, "Jeff King" <peff@peff.net> wrote:

>This topic came up
>recently, and I think the general consensus is that it would be cool to
>be able to do totally independent ranges, but that would be backwards
>incompatible with the current behavior.

That's totally sensible. I hadn't been able to tell from inspection
whether the behaviour was deliberate or not.

>which is of course slightly more annoying to type. If you're just
>interested in _single_ commits, though, you can just give the commits
>and turn off walking:
>
>  git log --no-walk 373af0c 590dfe2

Oh, nice! I hadn't seen that option.

By the way, the reason I'm even interested in this in the first place is
that the performance of commands like "git blame" and "git log" on files
and subtrees has become a problem for us (> 10 seconds per invocation,
forecast to get much worse), and I wanted to see whether I could feed "git
log" a specific list of revisions, and if so, whether that could yield
good performance.

I have it in mind to build a secondary index (maintained externally) so
that I can supply these git commands with precise lists of revisions for
much faster response times.

Thanks, guys!