Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes:
> You have full control of the growth function. So how about aggressive
> growth until 1024*10?
>
> That is:
>
> Current git:
> n < 1024: aggressive exponential
> 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024
> 1024 <= n: linear
> 2048, 3072, 4096, 5120, ...
>
> Initial proposal:
> n < 1024: aggressive exponential
> 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024
> 1024 <= n < 10240: linear
> 2048, 307, 4096, 5120, ...
> 10240 <= n: conservative exponential
> 11264, 12390, ...
>
> New proposal:
> n < 10240: aggressive exponential
> 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16384
> 10240 <= n: conservative exponential
> 18022, 19824, ...
>
> That way, on one hand it would still never use a smaller window than
> today and on the other hand the heuristic would be easier to
> understand (only decelarating, instead of decelarating and then
> accelerating again).
That sounds more explainable (I do not know if that is a growth
curve that gives us better results, though).
So, the result would look something like this, perhaps?
fetch-pack.c | 17 +++++++++++------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fetch-pack.c b/fetch-pack.c
index 3c5dfc4..97fe5f7 100644
--- a/fetch-pack.c
+++ b/fetch-pack.c
@@ -264,12 +264,17 @@ static void insert_one_alternate_ref(const struct ref
*ref, void *unused)
static int next_flush(struct fetch_pack_args *args, int count)
{
- int flush_limit = args->stateless_rpc ? LARGE_FLUSH : PIPESAFE_FLUSH;
-
- if (count < flush_limit)
- count <<= 1;
- else
- count += flush_limit;
+ if (args->stateless_rpc) {
+ if (count < LARGE_FLUSH * 10)
+ count <<= 1;
+ else
+ count = count * 11 / 10;
+ } else {
+ if (count < PIPESAFE_FLUSH)
+ count <<= 1;
+ else
+ count += PIPESAFE_FLUSH;
+ }
return count;
}
--
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
