On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes: > >> That's why I want to be a bit more generic and have this thread pool API >> done in C, such that "any for loop" in git can be easily replaced by using >> the thread pool. I think of "git fetch --all" specially. > > One more thing, as I didn't notice that you kept repeating "thread" > pool API.
Yeah I intended to use both threads and processes for the heavy submodule operations. Each thread in the thread pool would setup the right argument lists and environment and then spawn a process for heavy weight operations, wait for the process, maybe process its output. Maybe I should omit the whole thread pool and only use select from a single threaded main program. > > While I doubt that you would gain much by using threads in place of > processes to perform parallel "submodule update", "submodule clone", > "fetch all", etc., all of which are fairly well isolated and heavy > weight operations themselves, and I suspect that the implementation > simplicity of using separate processes would probably be huge plus > compared to any possible upside you may gain from using threads, if > you really want to go the "thread" route, the first thing to try > would be to see if a few places we already use threads for > parallelism (namely, "grep", "pack-objects", "preload-index" and > "index-pack") can be factored out and model your new API around the > commonality among them. -- 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
