On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:34:09AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 7:41 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
>> > I wonder if we could do even better, though. For a traversal, we only
>> > need to look at the commit header. We could potentially do a progressive
>> > inflate and stop before getting to the commit message (which is the bulk
>> > of the data, and the part that is most likely to benefit from
>> > compression).
>> Commit cache should solve this efficiently as it also eliminates
>> parsing cost. We discussed this last time as a side topic of the
>> reachability bitmap feature.
> I agree that a commit cache would solve this (though it can not help the
> tree traversal).

Yeah, caching trees efficiently is not easy.

> But just dropping the compression (or doing partial
> decompression when we only care about the beginning part) is way less
> code and complexity.

I think I tried the partial decompression for commit header and it did
not help much (or I misremember it, not so sure).

> There's no cache to manage.

If reachability bitmap is implemented, we'll have per-pack cache
infrastructure ready, so less work there for commit cache.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to