On 6/6/2018 4:13 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08 2018, Derrick Stolee wrote:
On 1/7/2018 5:42 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Sun, Jan 07 2018, Derrick Stolee jotted:
git log --oneline --raw --parents
Num Packs | Before MIDX | After MIDX | Rel % | 1 pack %
---
On Mon, Jan 08 2018, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> On 1/7/2018 5:42 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 07 2018, Derrick Stolee jotted:
>>
>>> git log --oneline --raw --parents
>>>
>>> Num Packs | Before MIDX | After MIDX | Rel % | 1 pack %
>>> --+-+-
On Wednesday, January 10, 2018 02:39:13 PM Derrick Stolee
wrote:
> On 1/10/2018 1:25 PM, Martin Fick wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 07, 2018 01:14:41 PM Derrick Stolee
> >
> > wrote:
> >> This RFC includes a new way to index the objects in
> >> multiple packs using one file, called the multi-pack
On 1/10/2018 1:25 PM, Martin Fick wrote:
On Sunday, January 07, 2018 01:14:41 PM Derrick Stolee
wrote:
This RFC includes a new way to index the objects in
multiple packs using one file, called the multi-pack
index (MIDX).
...
The main goals of this RFC are:
* Determine interest in this featur
On Sunday, January 07, 2018 01:14:41 PM Derrick Stolee
wrote:
> This RFC includes a new way to index the objects in
> multiple packs using one file, called the multi-pack
> index (MIDX).
...
> The main goals of this RFC are:
>
> * Determine interest in this feature.
>
> * Find other use cases fo
Hi Stefan,
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:05 AM, Johannes Schindelin
> wrote:
>
> > Just to throw this out there: --abbrev=8! would be one possible
> > convention to state "I want exactly 8 hex digits, don't bother
> > checking for uniqueness".
> >
> > Not su
On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 02:05:09PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > I think that could be easily worked around for rebase by asking git to
> > check ambiguity during the conversion.
>
> Sure.
>
> It also points to a flaw in your reasoning, and you should take my example
> further: previousl
Stefan Beller writes:
> Johannes wrote:
>> I think a better alternative would be to introduce a new abbreviation mode
>> that is *intended* to stop caring about unique abbreviations.
>>
>> In web interfaces, for example, it makes tons of sense to show, say, 8
>> digits in link texts and have the
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 12:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
>> And in that light, I'd like to propose a new naming scheme:
>>
>> (a) assume that we "tag" HEAD at the start of the rebase
>> (b) any abbreviation must be given as committish anchored to said ref:
>>
>> pick REBAS
Stefan Beller writes:
> And in that light, I'd like to propose a new naming scheme:
>
> (a) assume that we "tag" HEAD at the start of the rebase
> (b) any abbreviation must be given as committish anchored to said ref:
>
> pick REBASE_HEAD~1 commit subject
> pick REBASE_HEAD~2 distak the gostim
>
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:05 AM, Johannes Schindelin
wrote:
> Hi Peff,
>
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 02:43:00PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>> > Take the interactive rebase for example. It generates todo lists with
>> > abbreviated commit names, for
Hi Peff,
On Tue, 9 Jan 2018, Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 02:43:00PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > Take the interactive rebase for example. It generates todo lists with
> > abbreviated commit names, for readability (and it is *really* important to
> > keep this readable).
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 08:43:44AM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > Just to make sure I'm parsing this correctly: normal lookups do get faster
> > when you have a single index, given the right setup?
> >
> > I'm curious what that setup looked like. Is it just tons and tons of
> > packs? Is it one
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 02:43:00PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Take the interactive rebase for example. It generates todo lists with
> abbreviated commit names, for readability (and it is *really* important to
> keep this readable). As we expect new objects to be introduced by the
> intera
On 1/8/2018 5:20 AM, Jeff King wrote:
On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 07:08:54PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
(Not a critique of this, just a (stupid) question)
What's the practical use-case for this feature? Since it doesn't help
with --abbrev=40 the speedup is all in the part that ensures we don't
s
Hi Peff,
On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Jeff King wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 07:08:54PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
> > > (Not a critique of this, just a (stupid) question)
> > >
> > > What's the practical use-case for this feature? Since it doesn't
> > > help with --abbrev=40 the speedup is all
On Mon, Jan 08 2018, Jeff King jotted:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 05:20:29AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> I.e., what if we did something like this:
>>
>> diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
>> index 611c7d24dd..04c661ba85 100644
>> --- a/sha1_name.c
>> +++ b/sha1_name.c
>> @@ -600,6 +600,15 @@
On Mon, Jan 08 2018, Derrick Stolee jotted:
> On 1/7/2018 5:42 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> If something cares about both throughput and e.g. is saving the
>> abbreviated SHA-1s isn't it better off picking some arbitrary size
>> (e.g. --abbrev=20), after all the default abbreviation is g
On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 05:20:29AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> I.e., what if we did something like this:
>
> diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
> index 611c7d24dd..04c661ba85 100644
> --- a/sha1_name.c
> +++ b/sha1_name.c
> @@ -600,6 +600,15 @@ int find_unique_abbrev_r(char *hex, const unsigned
On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 07:08:54PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > (Not a critique of this, just a (stupid) question)
> >
> > What's the practical use-case for this feature? Since it doesn't help
> > with --abbrev=40 the speedup is all in the part that ensures we don't
> > show an ambiguous SHA-
On 1/7/2018 5:42 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Sun, Jan 07 2018, Derrick Stolee jotted:
git log --oneline --raw --parents
Num Packs | Before MIDX | After MIDX | Rel % | 1 pack %
--+-+++--
1 | 35.64 s |35.28 s | -1
On Sun, Jan 07 2018, Derrick Stolee jotted:
> git log --oneline --raw --parents
>
> Num Packs | Before MIDX | After MIDX | Rel % | 1 pack %
> --+-+++--
> 1 | 35.64 s |35.28 s | -1.0% | -1.0%
>24 | 90.81 s |40.
This RFC includes a new way to index the objects in multiple packs
using one file, called the multi-pack index (MIDX).
The commits are split into parts as follows:
[01] - A full design document.
[02] - The full file format for MIDX files.
[03] - Creation of core.midx config setting.
[04-12] -
23 matches
Mail list logo