Jeff King writes:
> On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 03:12:08PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
>> In my local copy, I added a test to p4211-line-log.sh that runs "git log
>> --raw -r" and tested it on three copies of the Linux repo. In order, they
>> have 1 packfile (0 loose), 24 packfiles
On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 03:12:08PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> In my local copy, I added a test to p4211-line-log.sh that runs "git log
> --raw -r" and tested it on three copies of the Linux repo. In order, they
> have 1 packfile (0 loose), 24 packfiles (0 loose), and 23 packfiles
> (~324,000
On 10/6/2017 10:11 AM, Jeff King wrote:
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:39:42AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
I'll run some perf numbers for these commands you recommend, and also see if
I can replicate some of the pain points that triggered this change using the
Linux repo.
Thanks!
-Peff
In my
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:39:42AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> > Actually, I'd just as soon see timings for "git log --format=%h" or "git
> > log --raw", as opposed to patches 1 and 2.
> >
> > You won't see a 90% speedup there, but you will see the actual
> > improvement that real-world users
On 10/5/2017 6:00 AM, Jeff King wrote:
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 06:48:10PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Jeff King writes:
This is weirdly specific. Can we accomplish the same thing with existing
tools?
E.g., could:
git cat-file --batch-all-objects
On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> Jeff King writes:
>>
> Actually, I'd just as soon see timings for "git log --format=%h" or "git
> log --raw", as opposed to patches 1 and 2.
>
> You won't see a 90% speedup there, but you will see the actual
>
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 06:48:10PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jeff King writes:
>
> > This is weirdly specific. Can we accomplish the same thing with existing
> > tools?
> >
> > E.g., could:
> >
> > git cat-file --batch-all-objects --batch-check='%(objectname)' |
> >
Jeff King writes:
> This is weirdly specific. Can we accomplish the same thing with existing
> tools?
>
> E.g., could:
>
> git cat-file --batch-all-objects --batch-check='%(objectname)' |
> shuffle |
> head -n 100
>
> do the same thing?
>
> I know that "shuffle" isn't
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 05:54:48AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> Create test-list-objects helper program to output a random sample of
> OIDs present in the repo.
>
> If no command line arguments are provided, all OIDs are output.
This is weirdly specific. Can we accomplish the same thing with
Derrick Stolee writes:
> diff --git a/t/helper/test-list-objects.c b/t/helper/test-list-objects.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0..83b1250fe
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/t/helper/test-list-objects.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
> +#include "cache.h"
> +#include "packfile.h"
>
10 matches
Mail list logo