David Turner <dtur...@twopensource.com> writes:

> ... I still believe that the cache-tree behavior would be
> suboptimal, ...

I do not think anybody doubts that "suboptimal"-ness in this thread.
As you saw the "incremental" thing from Peff and my responses to it,
there may be more things we could be doing.  It just has not been at
a ultra high priority, and if we can choose only one change from
possibilities, losing the entire cache-tree upon switching branches,
like in my two-way read-tree example, would be the thing that would
give us the most benefit if we somehow change it.

That however is unfortunately not a low-hanging fruit.  The two-way
merge machinery we use for switching branches wants to populate the
index one entry at a time, without having any point where you can
say "OK the result in this subdirectory will exactly match this
subtree" which would allow us to say "prime the cache tree for that
subdirectory with this tree object".

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