On 3/30/2017 4:39 PM, Jeff King wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 09:06:48PM +0100, Thomas Gummerer wrote:
Yeah, I think that would be fine. You _could_ write a t/perf test and
then use your 400MB monstrosity as GIT_PERF_LARGE_REPO. But given that
most people don't have such a thing, there's not much value over you
just showing off the perf improvement in the commit message.
Sorry if this was already discussed, but we already do have a perf
test for the index (p0002), and a corresponding helper program which
just does read_cache() and discard_cache(). Maybe we could re-use
that and add a second test running the same using the new config?
Oh, indeed. Yes, I would think the results of p0002 would probably show
off Jeff's improvements.
-Peff
Let me re-roll it with Junio's cleanup, update fsck to force it on,
and look at using p0002.
Thanks,
Jeff
