On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 09:30:20PM +0200, erik elfström wrote: >> >> Yes, that is the problem. A dry run will spot this particular performance >> issue but maybe we lose some value as a general performance test if >> we only do "half" the clean? Admittedly we clearly lose some value in >> the current state as well due to the copying taking more time than the >> cleaning. I could go either way here. > > I guess it is a matter of opinion. I think testing only the "find out > what to clean" half separately is actually beneficial, because it helps > us isolate any slowdown. If we want to add a test for the other half, we > can, but I do not actually think it is currently that interesting (it is > just calling unlink() in a loop). > > So even leaving the practical matters aside, I do not think it is a bad > thing to split it up. When you add in the fact that it is practically > much easier to test the first half, it seems to me that testing just > that is a good first step. > > -Peff
Sounds reasonable to me. I'll make this change in v4, thanks! (Sorry for the duplicate email Jeff, I'm bad at this mailing list thing...) /Erik -- 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
