From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BDD3C433DB for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 00:03:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3B964EAD for ; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 00:03:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230444AbhBQADh (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:03:37 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:35234 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229880AbhBQADg (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:03:36 -0500 Received: (qmail 15559 invoked by uid 109); 17 Feb 2021 00:02:56 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Feb 2021 00:02:56 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 30964 invoked by uid 111); 17 Feb 2021 00:02:55 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:02:55 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:02:55 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com, gitster@pobox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] p5303: measure time to repack with keep Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 06:58:16PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > For showing the impact of the optimizations in patches 7 and 8, I think > doing a full repack with --honor-pack-keep is a better test. Because > then we're always doing a full traversal, and most of the work continues > to scale with the repo size (though obviously not the actual shuffling > of packed bytes around). That would get rid of the weird "no work to do" > case in the single-pack tests, too. I meant to add: but I do like that we are timing --stdin-packs, too. We may actually want to time both. Another thing we _could_ do, if we have --honor-pack-keep perf tests, is to shuffle patches 5, 6, and 7 towards the front of the series. They should be able to show off the improvement even without the --stdin-packs feature. -Peff