On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 10:12 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > This feels weirdly specific, and like we should just be tuning our hash > table growth better. You show a 3.2% speedup here. I was able to get a > 2.8% speedup just by doing this:
It also uses a lot more memory. 5.8m entries for ".. * 2" and 8.8m for "... * 3". Probably no big deal for modern machines.. > It might be worth trying to figure out what the optimium growth rate is > first, which would help this use case and others. With less fragile > code. Agreed. Although I think it's getting out of my domain. I'm not even sure how many factors are involved. -- Duy -- 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
