On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:31:43AM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote:
>> > The timings from this one are roughly similar to what I posted earlier.
>> > Unlike the earlier version, this one keeps the data for a single commit
>> > together for better cache locality (though I don't think it made a big
>> > difference in my tests, since my cold-cache timing test ends up touching
>> > every commit anyway). The short of it is that for an extra 31M of disk
>> > space (~4%), I get a warm-cache speedup for "git rev-list --all" of
>> > ~4.2s to ~0.66s.
>> Some data point on caching 1-parent vs 2-parent commits on webkit
>> repo, 26k commits. With your changes (caching 2-parent commits), the
>> .commits file takes 2241600 bytes. "rev-list --all --quiet":
> Hmm. My webkit repo has zero merges in it (though it is the older
> svn-based one). What percentage of the one you have are merges? How does
> your 1-parent cache perform on something like git.git, where about 25%
> of all commits are merges?
git.git performs worse with 1-parent cache. But the point is it should
>> The performance loss in 1-parent case is not significant while disk
>> saving is (although it'll be less impressive after you do Shawn's
>> suggestion not storing SHA-1 directly)
> Yeah, I think moving to offsets instead of sha1s is going to be a big
> enough win that it won't matter anymore.
Yeah, if we use uint32_t instead of sha-1, the cache is just about
400k 2 parents for webkit, 312k for 1 parent. The total size is so
small that reduction does not really matter anymore.
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