D6312: branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev

2020-07-31 Thread baymax (Baymax, Your Personal Patch-care Companion) 
This revision now requires changes to proceed.
baymax added a comment.
baymax requested changes to this revision.


  There seems to have been no activities on this Diff for the past 3 Months.
  
  By policy, we are automatically moving it out of the `need-review` state.
  
  Please, move it back to `need-review` without hesitation if this diff should 
still be discussed.
  
  :baymax:need-review-idle:

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312/new/

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312

To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers, baymax
Cc: mercurial-patches, marmoute, yuja, mercurial-devel
___
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

D6312: branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev

2020-04-22 Thread marmoute (Pierre-Yves David) 
Herald added a subscriber: mercurial-patches.
marmoute added a comment.


  reping

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312/new/

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312

To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers
Cc: mercurial-patches, marmoute, yuja, mercurial-devel
___
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

D6312: branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev

2020-01-23 Thread marmoute (Pierre-Yves David) 
marmoute added a comment.


  This seems useful but lingering. @pulkit what's the status of this.

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312/new/

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312

To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers
Cc: marmoute, yuja, mercurial-devel
___
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

D6312: branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev

2019-04-28 Thread yuja (Yuya Nishihara) 
yuja added a comment.


  >   if ntiprev > self.tiprev:
  >   self.tiprev = ntiprev
  >   self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)
  > 
  > +self.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)
  > 
  >   if not self.validfor(repo):
  >   # cache key are not valid anymore
  
  and update `self.filteredhash` later again, which smells. Instead, shouldn't
  we check the validity first, and take the fast path only if it was valid?
  
if self.validfor(repo):  # was valid, can take fast path
self.tiprev = ntiprev
self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)
else:  # bad luck, recompute tiprev/tipnode
...
self.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312

To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers
Cc: yuja, mercurial-devel
___
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

Re: D6312: branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev

2019-04-28 Thread Yuya Nishihara 
>  if ntiprev > self.tiprev:
>  self.tiprev = ntiprev
>  self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)
> +self.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)
>  
>  if not self.validfor(repo):
>  # cache key are not valid anymore

and update `self.filteredhash` later again, which smells. Instead, shouldn't
we check the validity first, and take the fast path only if it was valid?

```
if self.validfor(repo):  # was valid, can take fast path
self.tiprev = ntiprev
self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)
else:  # bad luck, recompute tiprev/tipnode
...
self.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)
```
___
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

D6312: branchcache: update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev

2019-04-26 Thread pulkit (Pulkit Goyal) 
pulkit created this revision.
Herald added a subscriber: mercurial-devel.
Herald added a reviewer: hg-reviewers.

REVISION SUMMARY
  We update the tiprev and in next if statement we check whether the branchcache
  is valid or not. If the update of tiprev happens, then definitely
  self.validfor() will return False because filteredhash is old now.
  
  Let's update the filteredhash if we update the tiprev also. This prevents us
  from entering the loop where we iter all the heads, and find the tiprev.

REPOSITORY
  rHG Mercurial

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6312

AFFECTED FILES
  mercurial/branchmap.py

CHANGE DETAILS

diff --git a/mercurial/branchmap.py b/mercurial/branchmap.py
--- a/mercurial/branchmap.py
+++ b/mercurial/branchmap.py
@@ -411,6 +411,7 @@
 if ntiprev > self.tiprev:
 self.tiprev = ntiprev
 self.tipnode = cl.node(ntiprev)
+self.filteredhash = scmutil.filteredhash(repo, self.tiprev)
 
 if not self.validfor(repo):
 # cache key are not valid anymore



To: pulkit, #hg-reviewers
Cc: mercurial-devel
___
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel