From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] git log: support "auto" decorations
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 09:55:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqvbsn9pfx.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140530065737.GA13591@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 30 May 2014 02:57:38 -0400")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 09:54:10PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> That said, part of it is just that show-signature is so suboptimal
>> performance-wise, re-parsing the commit buffer for each commit when
>> "show_signature" is set. That's just crazy, we've already parsed the
>> commit text, we already *could* know if it has a signature or not, and
>> skip it if it doesn't. That would require one of the flag bits in the
>> object, though, or something, so it's probably not worth doing.
>
> Wow, it's really quite bad. Not only do we spend time on commits that we
> could otherwise know do not have signatures, but we actually pull the
> buffer from disk, even though we generally have it saved as
> commit->buffer.
The one for the signature on the commit itself is me being lazy and
defensive; I did not want to have to worry about people mucking with
what is in commit->buffer for whatever reason (e.g. re-encode in
different charset, etc.) and then asking the signature validated.
The other one for the merge-tag is me just being lazy, as it is
unlikely to be corrupt by any reasonable kinds of mucking with
commit->buffer on a merge.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-30 16:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-29 22:31 [RFC PATCH] git log: support "auto" decorations Linus Torvalds
2014-05-30 1:58 ` Jeff King
2014-05-30 4:54 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-05-30 6:57 ` Jeff King
2014-05-30 16:55 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2014-05-30 17:03 ` Jeff King
2014-05-30 17:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-05-30 18:34 ` Jeff King
2014-05-30 18:39 ` Jeff King
2014-05-30 20:44 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-05-30 20:48 ` Jeff King
2014-05-30 21:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-05-30 20:52 ` Junio C Hamano
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=xmqqvbsn9pfx.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).