From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] gitweb: Remove --parents from call to git-rev-list in parse_rev_list Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:18:26 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <11575480921132-git-send-email-jnareb@gmail.com> <11575761821830-git-send-email-jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 06 23:18:57 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GL4nE-00085q-58 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:18:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751556AbWIFVSl (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 17:18:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751598AbWIFVSl (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 17:18:41 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:11649 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751556AbWIFVSk (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 17:18:40 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GL4n0-00083O-4h for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:18:30 +0200 Received: from host-81-190-21-28.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.21.28]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:18:30 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-21-28.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:18:30 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-21-28.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, 6 Sep 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote: >> >> Benchmarks (7 means patch before, 8 means this patch): > > Btw, you should possibly look at cold-cache numbers, and numbers for > projects that aren't fully packed. They can often be _dramatically_ > different. By the way I forgot that the case 8 is for the repository with 1 commit more, although that shouldn't matter much for paginated output. Still, it is one commit more unpacked. Benchmark for 7 was also for partially packed repository. > That said, the dramatic change would probably be if there were some way to > avoid using "--full-history" (rather than "--parents", which doesn't add > _that_ much overhead), since that "follow all parents" behaviour of > full-history is usually what really makes a big deal. > > But I guess for gitweb, you do want to use --full-history in this case ;( It is now easy with patch 3/7 "Use @hist_opts as git-rev-list parameters in git_history" to remove '--full-history' from git-rev-list parameters in git_history subroutine. Or add '--remove-empty' which matters only for the last page of file/directory history output. I had some simple benchmark that shown that the earlier version with filtering via piping git-rev-list to git-diff-tree --stdin -- was slightly faster than git-rev-list --full-history -- (current version). If I remember correctly of course. And this version can be easily extended to include renames (but not file to directory changes). -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git