Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Sahitya Chandra <sahityajb@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, avarab@gmail.com,
	stolee@gmail.com, peff@peff.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wt-status: avoid quadratic insertion for untracked paths
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 08:27:09 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alnLPSnOt_Sf7cA5@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260716185045.229320-1-sahityajb@gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 12:20:45AM +0530, Sahitya Chandra wrote:
> wt_status_collect_untracked() copies entries from dir.entries and
> dir.ignored into string_lists using string_list_insert(). That keeps the
> destination lists sorted and deduplicated, but each insertion may shift
> the backing array, making construction O(n^2) in the number of paths.
> 
> Collect the entries with string_list_append() instead, then sort and
> deduplicate each list once. This preserves the sorted, duplicate-free
> result while reducing the construction cost to O(n log n).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sahitya Chandra <sahityajb@gmail.com>
> ---
> Notes for reviewers:
> 
> fill_directory() currently sorts dir.entries and dir.ignored
> before returning, so another possible approach would be to append the
> entries directly and rely on that order, reducing this copy step to O(n).
> That would require relying on these arrays not containing duplicate
> entries, though, which I have not been able to verify yet. This patch
> takes the safer approach of preserving the existing duplicate-removal
> behavior from `string_list_insert()` by sorting and deduplicating once
> after appending.

Out of curiosity: is this something that you have encountered in the
real world as inefficient, or is this rather a theoretical inefficiency?
If the former it would be great to add a small benchmark to the commit
message.

> diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c
> index 58461e02f8..13a7cf7946 100644
> --- a/wt-status.c
> +++ b/wt-status.c
> @@ -832,14 +832,18 @@ static void wt_status_collect_untracked(struct wt_status *s)
>  	for (i = 0; i < dir.nr; i++) {
>  		struct dir_entry *ent = dir.entries[i];
>  		if (index_name_is_other(istate, ent->name, ent->len))
> -			string_list_insert(&s->untracked, ent->name);
> +			string_list_append(&s->untracked, ent->name);
>  	}
> +	string_list_sort(&s->untracked);
> +	string_list_remove_duplicates(&s->untracked, 0);

Instead of sorting and then deduplicating you can call
`string_list_sort_u()`. It does the exact same thing as you do here, but
I guess it makes sense to use that interface anyway.

>  	for (i = 0; i < dir.ignored_nr; i++) {
>  		struct dir_entry *ent = dir.ignored[i];
>  		if (index_name_is_other(istate, ent->name, ent->len))
> -			string_list_insert(&s->ignored, ent->name);
> +			string_list_append(&s->ignored, ent->name);
>  	}
> +	string_list_sort(&s->ignored);
> +	string_list_remove_duplicates(&s->ignored, 0);

Likewise.

Overall this looks like a sensible thing to do though. Thanks!

Patrick

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-17  6:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-16 18:50 [PATCH] wt-status: avoid quadratic insertion for untracked paths Sahitya Chandra
2026-07-17  6:27 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2026-07-17  7:54   ` Jeff King

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=alnLPSnOt_Sf7cA5@pks.im \
    --to=ps@pks.im \
    --cc=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=sahityajb@gmail.com \
    --cc=stolee@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