On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 9:23 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:41 PM Elijah Newren wrote:
> > (And in the mean time I gave the user a one-liner to nuke his
> > local-only tags that I suspect he doesn't need.)
>
> Just a note that you can usually set
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 7:22 AM Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
> On 10/17/2018 2:00 PM, Elijah Newren wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just wanted to give a shout-out for the commit-graph work and how
> > impressive it is. I had an internal report from a user that git
> > pushes containing only one new tiny
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 8:41 PM Elijah Newren wrote:
> (And in the mean time I gave the user a one-liner to nuke his
> local-only tags that I suspect he doesn't need.)
Just a note that you can usually set 'fetch.pruneTags=true' these days
to make that happen.
On 10/17/2018 2:00 PM, Elijah Newren wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to give a shout-out for the commit-graph work and how
impressive it is. I had an internal report from a user that git
pushes containing only one new tiny commit were taking over a minute
(in a moderate size repo with good network
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 11:00:03AM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> Digging in, almost all the time was CPU-bound and spent in
> add_missing_tags()[2]. If I'm reading the code correctly, it appears
> that function loops over each tag, calling in_merge_bases_many() once
> per tag. Thus, for his
On 10/17/2018 2:00 PM, Elijah Newren wrote:
Hi,
Just wanted to give a shout-out for the commit-graph work and how
impressive it is. I had an internal report from a user that git
pushes containing only one new tiny commit were taking over a minute
(in a moderate size repo with good network
Hi,
Just wanted to give a shout-out for the commit-graph work and how
impressive it is. I had an internal report from a user that git
pushes containing only one new tiny commit were taking over a minute
(in a moderate size repo with good network connectivity). After
digging for a while, I
7 matches
Mail list logo