From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (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 A83ED394 for ; Wed, 15 Nov 2023 00:44:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="gj16oRYw" Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96EF95 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:44:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600581B944; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:44:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=DcvDm+Nv2/pJG/jrX9cKMYrZlkG8OqcIvHhWfL 9ZOJo=; b=gj16oRYwdWKm/sfeTFPxozJ6NCjsH0LYtCQ6I6tpAA/obZIoO/ElwF MB+7nEDWB/nST6ajV7NG0nTp7KUWqBwMDLRVuF+9eLDEUjj0u4qzQOstXduHU4Nr 5cHwB6veqXIWzjgjvtrqQHvT4mkciZBio3a70vWeQ3t6psRs3Xl9A= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563171B943; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:44:43 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.153.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D4C061B93F; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:44:39 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Patrick Steinhardt , git@vger.kernel.org, Karthik Nayak Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit-graph: disable GIT_COMMIT_GRAPH_PARANOIA by default In-Reply-To: <20231114194310.GC2092538@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 14 Nov 2023 14:43:10 -0500") References: <7e2d300c4af9a7853201121d66f982afa421bbba.1699957350.git.ps@pks.im> <20231114194310.GC2092538@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:44:38 +0900 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 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 28B7A20A-8350-11EE-B260-A19503B9AAD1-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Jeff King 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.