Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com>,
	gitster@pobox.com, szeder.dev@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/5] log: speed up --follow following renames for non-linear history
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2026 12:41:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <avRicTWUWuyOuUNP@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <avRG5r8DPrS23Nmk@pks.im>

Hi Patrick,

On Wed, Nov 11, 2026 at 11:43:50AM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> wrote:
> > While the original patch and this series do improve correctness of
> > following a file through history, I wonder if the increased cost is
> > ultimately worth it in most scenarios. Maybe this could be something
> > opt-in with another flag instead of toggled on my default?
> 
> Yeah, by now I'm also leaning into this direction. The performance cost
> is definitely way too high for us, so we need a way to disable this new
> feature altogether at GitLab.

I have no problem with turning this from default to opt-in. I would be
happy to not revert, since a lot of effort went into this, and some see
this as a bug in git-log, not showing some history which is there.

> I don't have a strong sense on whether or not we should revert the whole
> series. I find the patches quite hard to review, but that may not be
> because we're fixing things incrementally and rather be because I myself
> am not familiar with this subsystem.
> 
> But in case we decide to not revert I'd like to see a toggle to disable
> this feature as a first step. As mentioned, this change has caused a
> rather big regression for GitLab, so we'd ideally have a way to disable
> this feature soon so that we can mitigate it.

Makes sense. To be honest, I'm not too happy about the complexity the
last patch in the series introduces -- but having performance that is
somewhat close to the old behavior seems to justify it.

> I don't want to make you (Miklos) responsible for delivering that of
> course, I just want us to align on a fast path forward. In case we don't
> revert we can help out and contribute such a default-disabled toggle.
> And if so, that would also give us more time to fix the issue properly.

Yes, aligning on what we want would be good. :-) I'm OK to replace the
last patch in the series with a patch that turns this off by default,
but then how to opt in, would be be fine to have a new config option for
this (similar to log.follow)? Would that do what you need or you want
something else?

Thanks,

Miklos

  reply	other threads:[~2026-11-11 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-13 13:55 Performance regression in `git log --follow` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-10-13 21:24 ` SZEDER Gábor
2026-10-15 14:48   ` [PATCH] log: speed up --follow following renames for non-linear history Miklos Vajna
2026-10-15 16:57     ` Junio C Hamano
2026-10-19  6:10       ` [PATCH v2] " Miklos Vajna
2026-10-22 20:45         ` [PATCH v3 0/4] " Miklos Vajna
2026-10-22 20:45           ` [PATCH v3 1/4] t4219: test more --follow cases across merges Miklos Vajna
2026-10-22 20:46           ` [PATCH v3 2/4] log: extract showing the remerge/combined diff of a merge commit Miklos Vajna
2026-10-22 20:46           ` [PATCH v3 3/4] log: simplify --follow following renames for non-linear history Miklos Vajna
2026-10-26 11:40             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-10-22 20:47           ` [PATCH v3 4/4] log: speed up " Miklos Vajna
2026-10-26 11:40             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-10-26 11:42           ` [PATCH v3 0/4] " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-10-30 20:07           ` [PATCH v4 0/6] " Miklos Vajna
2026-10-30 20:07             ` [PATCH v4 1/6] t4219: test more --follow cases across merges Miklos Vajna
2026-10-30 20:07             ` [PATCH v4 2/6] log: extract showing the remerge/combined diff of a merge commit Miklos Vajna
2026-10-30 20:08             ` [PATCH v4 3/6] log: fix -m --follow losing the history of later parents Miklos Vajna
2026-10-30 20:08             ` [PATCH v4 4/6] log: simplify --follow following renames for non-linear history Miklos Vajna
2026-10-30 20:09             ` [PATCH v4 5/6] log: speed up " Miklos Vajna
2026-11-06 14:14               ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-11-09  8:02                 ` Miklos Vajna
2026-10-30 20:10             ` [PATCH v4 6/6] log: fix --follow following an edit on a side the merge did not take Miklos Vajna
2026-11-06 14:14               ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-11-09  8:03                 ` Miklos Vajna
2026-11-06 14:14             ` [PATCH v4 0/6] log: speed up --follow following renames for non-linear history Patrick Steinhardt
2026-11-09  8:01               ` Miklos Vajna
2026-11-09  8:03             ` [PATCH v5 0/5] " Miklos Vajna
2026-11-09  8:04               ` [PATCH v5 1/5] t4219: test more --follow cases across merges Miklos Vajna
2026-11-10 23:06                 ` Justin Tobler
2026-11-09  8:05               ` [PATCH v5 2/5] log: extract showing the remerge/combined diff of a merge commit Miklos Vajna
2026-11-09  8:05               ` [PATCH v5 3/5] log: fix -m --follow losing the history of later parents Miklos Vajna
2026-11-09  8:05               ` [PATCH v5 4/5] log: simplify --follow following renames for non-linear history Miklos Vajna
2026-11-10 16:45                 ` Toon Claes
2026-11-09  8:06               ` [PATCH v5 5/5] log: speed up " Miklos Vajna
2026-11-11  0:40               ` [PATCH v5 0/5] " Justin Tobler
2026-11-11 10:43                 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-11-11 12:41                   ` Miklos Vajna [this message]
2026-11-11 13:29                     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-11-12  9:05                       ` [PATCH] log: make --follow following renames for non-linear history optional Miklos Vajna
2026-11-11 16:44                 ` [PATCH v5 0/5] log: speed up --follow following renames for non-linear history Junio C Hamano
2026-10-16 20:37     ` [PATCH] " Junio C Hamano
2026-10-14  6:16 ` Performance regression in `git log --follow` Miklos Vajna

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=avRicTWUWuyOuUNP@collabora.com \
    --to=vmiklos@collabora.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=jltobler@gmail.com \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    --cc=szeder.dev@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