Jeff King <> writes:

> Just looking at the 128-day case again, using bitmaps increased our
> server CPU time _and_ made a much bigger pack. This series not only
> fixes the CPU time regression, but it also drops the server CPU time to
> almost nothing. That's a nice improvement, and it makes perfect sense:
> we are reusing on-disk deltas instead of on-the-fly computing deltas
> against the preferred bases.


> I think we could still add the objects from the tip of the client's HAVE
> list.

That should make the result at least per to the non-bitmap case,

> This patch would still be a CPU win on top of that, because it
> would reduce the number of objects which need a delta search in the
> first place.


> So I think the next steps are probably:
>   1. Measure the "all objects are preferred bases" approach and confirm
>      that it is bad.


>   2. Measure the "reused deltas become preferred bases" approach. I
>      expect the resulting size to be slightly better than what I have
>      now, but not as good as v1.9.0's size (but taking less CPU time).

Do you mean "the bases for reused deltas become preferred bases, so
that we can deltify more objects off of them"?

>   3. Measure the "figure out boundaries and add them as preferred bases,
>      like we do without bitmaps" approach. I expect this to behave
>      similarly to v1.9.0.


>   4. Combine (2) and (3) and measure them. I'm _hoping_ this will give
>      us the best of both worlds, but I still want to do the individual
>      measurements so we can see where any improvement is coming from.

Sensible.  Thanks.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to