From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46101C432BE for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 20:21:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D7E460F5B for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 20:21:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242633AbhHZUWO (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 16:22:14 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:62244 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229916AbhHZUWN (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 16:22:13 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846B514BD08; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 16:21:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=d1LChuk+k+IjgJwnN+Qy2aDoe/P19EkWFCdfTq Am2Vk=; b=CckfmgOPzQ6Va5Mz/32FnNZjkn0+ewNnu3YHDN61bd6MfODsOLd4k1 Zcxun16Vn9uwhewjRccW4+q2S+/c559dOkFt0z6FG0oBu4jJbBic6sLaaN98fFAs r9zv4eBFLZoc9Lz/8u0JMu2wh36Ki6qEnVyBalZeDPDS68Av8Dq/Y= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C54C14BD07; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 16:21:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.116.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C159514BD06; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 16:21:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jacob Vosmaer Cc: peff@peff.net, me@ttaylorr.com, git@vger.kernel.org, ps@pks.im Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] upload-pack: use stdio in send_ref callbacks References: <20210826100648.10333-1-jacob@gitlab.com> <20210826100648.10333-2-jacob@gitlab.com> Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 13:21:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Thu, 26 Aug 2021 09:33:08 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 2E542E14-06AB-11EC-8117-FA11AF6C5138-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > IIUC, the most notable difference between this round and the > previous one is that now we are no longer buffering more than one > packet worth of data because we let the stdio to accumulate them. > I was a bit surprised that we still want to have a strbuf inside > this structure (which is there only because it wants to persist > during the whole conversation with the other side). > > Ahh, sorry, scratch that. I do remember the discussion/patch that > it was hurting to make calls to strbuf-init/strbuf-release once per > ref, and it is an easy way to have the structure here to reuse it. But that means this majorly overlaps what Patrick is already doing in his ps/ls-refs-strbuf-optim topic. Perhaps these should be rebased on top of that topic branch, I wonder?