From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit-graph: disable GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA by default
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:44:38 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq4jhnyhe1.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231114194310.GC2092538@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 14 Nov 2023 14:43:10 -0500")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> What I'm getting as it that I think we have three options for v2.43:
>
> 1. Ship what has been in the release candidates, which has a known
> performance regression (though the severity is up for debate).
>
> 2. Flip the default to "0" (i.e., Patrick's patch in this thread). We
> know that loosens some cases versus 2.42, which may be considered a
> regression.
>
> 3. Sort it out before the release. We're getting pretty close to do
> a lot new work there, but I think the changes should be small-ish.
> The nuclear option is ejecting the topic and re-doing it in the
> next cycle.
>
> I don't have a really strong preference between the three.
I've been (naively) assuming that #1 is everybody's preference,
simply because #2 does introduce a regression in the correctness
department (as opposed to a possible performance regression caused
by #1), and because #3 has a high risk of screwing up.
As long as the performance regression is known and on our radar,
I'd say that working on a maintenance release after Thanksgiving
would be sufficient.
I might be underestimating the impact of the loss of performance,
though, in which case I'd consider that nuclear one, which is the
simplest and least risky.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-15 0:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-14 10:23 [PATCH] commit-graph: disable GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA by default Patrick Steinhardt
2023-11-14 10:35 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-11-14 14:42 ` Taylor Blau
2023-11-14 16:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-14 16:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-14 19:43 ` Jeff King
2023-11-15 0:44 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2023-11-15 1:36 ` Jeff King
2023-11-15 13:35 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-11-16 0:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-16 11:19 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-12-06 19:49 ` Jeff King
2023-11-20 11:01 ` [PATCH v2] " Patrick Steinhardt
2023-11-23 11:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-24 11:07 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2023-11-24 11:08 ` [PATCH v3] " Patrick Steinhardt
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=xmqq4jhnyhe1.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=karthik.188@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).