Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:35:45AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Steffen Prohaska <proha...@zib.de> writes:
>> >> Couldn't we do that with an lseek (or even an mmap with offset 0)? That
>> >> obviously would not work for non-file inputs, but I think we address
>> >> that already in index_fd: we push non-seekable things off to index_pipe,
>> >> where we spool them to memory.
>> > It could be handled that way, but we would be back to the original problem
>> > that 32-bit git fails for large files.
>> Correct, and you are making an incremental improvement so that such
>> a large blob can be handled _when_ the filters can successfully
>> munge it back and forth. If we fail due to out of memory when the
>> filters cannot, that would be the same as without your improvement,
>> so you are still making progress.
> I do not think my proposal makes anything worse than Steffen's patch.
I think we are saying the same thing, but perhaps I didn't phrase it
> I think the main argument against going further is just that it is not
> worth the complexity. Tell people doing reduction filters they need to
> use "required", and that accomplishes the same thing.
>> >> So it seems like the ideal strategy would be:
>> >> 1. If it's seekable, try streaming. If not, fall back to lseek/mmap.
>> >> 2. If it's not seekable and the filter is required, try streaming. We
>> >> die anyway if we fail.
>> Puzzled... Is it assumed that any content the filters tell us to
>> use the contents from the db as-is by exiting with non-zero status
>> will always be large not to fit in-core? For small contents, isn't
>> this "ideal" strategy a regression?
> I am not sure what you mean by regression here. We will try to stream
> more often, but I do not see that as a bad thing.
I thought the proposed flow I was commenting on was
- try streaming and die if the filter fails
For an optional filter working on contents that would fit in core,
we currently do
- slurp in memory, filter it, use the original if the filter fails
If we switched to 2., then... ahh, ok, I misread "is required" part.
The "regression" does not apply to that case at all.
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