Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-12-01 Thread David Turner
On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 18:13 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:12 AM, David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com wrote: Or will you go with cityhash now.. I ask because you have another sse optimization for hashmap on your watchman branch and that could reduce init time for

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-28 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 1:12 AM, David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com wrote: Or will you go with cityhash now.. I ask because you have another sse optimization for hashmap on your watchman branch and that could reduce init time for name-hash. Name-hash is used often on case-insensitive fs

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-19 Thread Paolo Ciarrocchi
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:25 AM, David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com wrote: My patches are not the world's most beautiful, but they do work. Out of curiosity: do you run the patches at twitter? Thanks. -- Paolo -- Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-19 Thread David Turner
On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 16:26 +0100, Paolo Ciarrocchi wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 1:25 AM, David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com wrote: My patches are not the world's most beautiful, but they do work. Out of curiosity: do you run the patches at twitter? An increasing number of us do,

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-18 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:25 AM, David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com wrote: So we got a few options: 1) Convince watchman devs to add something to make it work Based on the thread on the watchman github it looks like this won't happen. Yeah. I came to the conclusion that I needed an extra

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-18 Thread David Turner
On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 17:48 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: My patches are not the world's most beautiful, but they do work. I think some improvement might be possible by keeping info about tracked files in the index, and only storing the tree of ignored and untracked files separately. But I

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-18 Thread Junio C Hamano
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes: On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 17:48 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: My patches are not the world's most beautiful, but they do work. I think some improvement might be possible by keeping info about tracked files in the index, and only storing the tree of

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-18 Thread David Turner
On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 12:55 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes: On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 17:48 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: My patches are not the world's most beautiful, but they do work. I think some improvement might be possible by keeping info about

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-18 Thread Junio C Hamano
David Turner dtur...@twopensource.com writes: On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 12:55 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: I vaguely recall that the reason why we dropped it was because it was too much code churn in an area that was being worked on in parallel, but you may need to go back to the list archive for

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-18 Thread Jeff King
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 01:26:56PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: It is not check_refname_format() that is the real problem. It's the fact that we do O(# of refs) work whenever we have to access the packed-refs file. check_refname_format() is part of that, surely, but so is reading the file,

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-17 Thread David Turner
On Tue, 2014-11-11 at 19:49 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: I've come to the last piece to speed up git status, watchman support. And I realized it's not as good as I thought. Watchman could be used for two things: to avoid refreshing the index, and to avoid searching for ignored files. The first

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-14 Thread Torsten Bögershausen
On 11/13/2014 01:22 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote: On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Torsten Bögershausen tbo...@web.de wrote: From a Git user perspective it could be good to have something like this: a) git status -u b) git status -uno c) git status -umtime d) git status -uwatchman We know that

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-13 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Torsten Bögershausen tbo...@web.de wrote: From a Git user perspective it could be good to have something like this: a) git status -u b) git status -uno c) git status -umtime d) git status -uwatchman We know that a) and b) already exist. c) Can be

Re: [RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-12 Thread Torsten Bögershausen
On 2014-11-11 13.49, Duy Nguyen wrote: I've come to the last piece to speed up git status, watchman support. And I realized it's not as good as I thought. Watchman could be used for two things: to avoid refreshing the index, and to avoid searching for ignored files. The first one can be done

[RFC] On watchman support

2014-11-11 Thread Duy Nguyen
I've come to the last piece to speed up git status, watchman support. And I realized it's not as good as I thought. Watchman could be used for two things: to avoid refreshing the index, and to avoid searching for ignored files. The first one can be done (with the patch below as demonstration).