From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, johannes.schindelin@gmx.de, peff@peff.net,
ps@pks.im, me@ttaylorr.com, johncai86@gmail.com,
newren@gmail.com, Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] pack-objects: create new name-hash algorithm
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 11:06:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqjzfkr9b0.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.1785.git.1725890210.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget's message of "Mon, 09 Sep 2024 13:56:46 +0000")
"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> One way to find some improvement in these repositories is to increase the
> window size, which was an initial indicator that the delta compression could
> be improved, but was not a clear indicator. After some digging (and
> prototyping some analysis tools) the main discovery was that the current
> name-hash algorithm only considers the last 16 characters in the path name
> and has some naturally-occurring collisions within that scope.
Yes, as I explained in the other message, this "collision" is an
integral part of the design to allow us gather candidates together
that may yield good deltas among them. In addition, header files
whose names end with ".h" tend to share a bit comment at the
beginning of them in many projects, and the proximity (not
"collision") of the hash value is used to make them delta candidates
with each other.
I do agree that considering files at the same path from different
(but close-by) revisions as the prime candidates is very important,
but if you spread the "collissions" very thin by using "uniform
distribution", I am afraid that you'd end up discarding anything but
the blobs at the same path, which may go too far. Having name hash
value that are close by no longer has any meaning in such a system.
I hope you can find a solution that strikes a good balance at the
end of the series (I saw only the first step), but I suspect an easy
way to avoid the downsides you observed is to use both. Compare
with a handful of blobs taken from nearby commits (the original
object order is roughly in traversal order, and you can take
advantage of that fact) from exactly the same path (using your
"uniform distribution") before comparing with the blobs with close
value (of the current function) like the current implementation
does, may go a long way.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-09 18:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-09 13:56 [PATCH 0/4] pack-objects: create new name-hash algorithm Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 1/4] pack-objects: add --full-name-hash option Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-09 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-10 2:31 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 2/4] git-repack: update usage to match docs Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-09 17:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] p5313: add size comparison test Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-09 13:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] p5314: add a size test for name-hash collisions Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-09 16:07 ` [PATCH 0/4] pack-objects: create new name-hash algorithm Derrick Stolee
2024-09-09 18:06 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2024-09-10 2:37 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-10 14:56 ` Taylor Blau
2024-09-10 21:05 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-11 6:32 ` Jeff King
2024-09-10 16:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-10 20:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-10 21:09 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] " Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] pack-objects: add --full-name-hash option Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-19 21:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] repack: test " Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-19 22:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] pack-objects: add GIT_TEST_FULL_NAME_HASH Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-19 22:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-23 1:39 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] git-repack: update usage to match docs Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] p5313: add size comparison test Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-19 21:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-23 1:50 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-23 16:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-09-18 20:46 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] test-tool: add helper for name-hash values Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget
2024-09-24 7:02 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-09-25 13:35 ` Derrick Stolee
2024-09-18 23:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] pack-objects: create new name-hash algorithm Derrick Stolee
2024-10-04 21:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-10-04 22:30 ` Taylor Blau
2024-10-04 22:35 ` Jeff King
2024-10-08 18:32 ` Derrick Stolee
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=xmqqjzfkr9b0.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=johncai86@gmail.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=newren@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
--cc=stolee@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).