From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a7-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a7-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20FA5219E0 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 21:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.150 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750712435; cv=none; b=a+VuJm7AZ1P/liIN8DkQtH5yZ3f6ejhnjaZttcdAFSLnQFoPkrMI3i6ouOYw/EJDA7dHqk82+oVjAjDggP3Ihun4YcdEOGBo9M9djIFTiJetb3+4Z2L/RJDXujhts85Tci6g8dfCua1lGP5MD2MAfTI1unRzTzj4/XoS2GdPiss= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750712435; c=relaxed/simple; bh=F7gl1JFMBR/fPRoOhR+YhmvvIEG9Jk90pX462n/BEBk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NNJyRI7IrmojlDk+fblqjtiS2ZOI8xyKvmUQhaerFsK9zhYksRgC4lSS6YEcQdmF0/l0qNt7oRl0Z8AgANVE7vdjr17AyB9ZI8ktAidzWu4TbdyrV1ecljiaoJxf5X0TtVjhHPa8aRt6DoXc2gwhfPTywNS7F+TUSC7RCh3JX48= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=PEE6vJMQ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=o3HjCFOz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.150 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="PEE6vJMQ"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="o3HjCFOz" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.phl.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ABCF1380DB4; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 17:00:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 23 Jun 2025 17:00:32 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1750712432; x=1750798832; bh=50NGseunFV Drjb/5iupCAVmrOxt5E8KKuxl+0d3Xz7M=; b=PEE6vJMQ3Jt4lm+3I8Nq0ztqWP E84+x2HzCyUDPO8DQNwL7s68tnIDLyN12usFJEsTxKv7gFFiDkirfSkx49iTp23N yFEkfX7pW5gaKlDD7aognP3wU9ae8LNXCeO6nsaY3FVEPb3MHtIBuIcmnWtCTxFk +6eUZL7mY6uDvhoC3DaRTMtC6yQg7o9RU2QmujESAtGbeB5d4NpqHsA3TVK0TCG9 Woeh+3kID6uldnscjrVg6Y+27/br7fP6hDAcrRqmp0LA66o5bjG04qsvpXgw9zMS yupALonf047xtkEw1Wy+COuNHQFauo74klRL044SmLJ1fTYY9Sl8ogL0Ii1w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1750712432; x=1750798832; bh=50NGseunFVDrjb/5iupCAVmrOxt5E8KKuxl +0d3Xz7M=; b=o3HjCFOzSJJ/311au6lSgn9v/+ZV4dqin4tWVM+hGLNqFlbCWto bzQ4bp3SgUHCzmUg11ZCTMgYwsaHkB+xH00Cxg8GmD/muQz+ElY7GLy15mNLyFba +b04v7JaGILqrPSYcZjcbQoenUqxcPLMBsGkWynfysiLDZy9LlbW82Rhrdz+tep9 30/QnVL2Enr+I9KLwl57Tifi75+6//SWJsMrr1pRBnPZYKiU/XBpM1fXLaBIx6wv wb3Z9mUwDKfWSkq1q57BpuXhsyDLUTf0s82+ovBn3QZU8/Apb+gB8QC9QHNt81xA 9Shb/IrXKw3eavIEcF3MR7lMqyztZ1kcJag== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtddvgddukedtgecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucev ucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeiveffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieeg ieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeefpdhmohguvgepshhm thhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehkrghikhhophhonhgvnhesghhoohhglhgvrdgtohhmpd hrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehg ihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 23 Jun 2025 17:00:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Kai Koponen Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Perf bug: rev-list w/ 2+ paths relatively slow with commit-graph In-Reply-To: (Kai Koponen's message of "Mon, 23 Jun 2025 16:19:13 -0400") References: Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 14:00:30 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Kai Koponen writes: > I see, more of a perf FR than a bug then. > I don't have much expertise here, but on the surface of it, it doesn't > seem to me like there would be any reason the algorithm couldn't check > each path's bloom filter in turn while searching, other than that this > would be a large and annoying change. It looks like that the necessary changes are probably fairly well isolated to two functions, i.e., prepare_to_use_bloom_filter() and forbid_bloom_filters(). Right now, for a pathspec that has one element "dir/file", the code uses two bloom keys for "dir" and "dir/file", but if we have "dir1/file1" as well, then it does look like a matter of using two more (and the bloom_keys[] array is designed to be variable length). But those who have more intimate knowledge in the area than I do may point out what is missing in my "it looks like" gut feeling.