[PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-10-25 Thread Yuya Nishihara
# HG changeset patch # User Yuya Nishihara # Date 1477199774 -32400 # Sun Oct 23 14:16:14 2016 +0900 # Branch stable # Node ID 242b7a856495179795ee5662f298029c4b492563 # Parent ecbce2fe4dea116c925a2fecd1b7b50df0a62589 changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-10-26 Thread Yuya Nishihara
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:17:14 +0900, Yuya Nishihara wrote: > # HG changeset patch > # User Yuya Nishihara > # Date 1477199774 -32400 > # Sun Oct 23 14:16:14 2016 +0900 > # Branch stable > # Node ID 242b7a856495179795ee5662f298029c4b492563 > # Parent ecbce2fe4dea116c925a2fecd1b7b50df0a62589 >

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-10-28 Thread Pierre-Yves David
On 10/26/2016 03:17 PM, Yuya Nishihara wrote: On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:17:14 +0900, Yuya Nishihara wrote: # HG changeset patch # User Yuya Nishihara # Date 1477199774 -32400 # Sun Oct 23 14:16:14 2016 +0900 # Branch stable # Node ID 242b7a856495179795ee5662f298029c4b492563 # Parent ecbce2

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-10-28 Thread Yuya Nishihara
On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:40 +0200, Pierre-Yves David wrote: > On 10/26/2016 03:17 PM, Yuya Nishihara wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:17:14 +0900, Yuya Nishihara wrote: > >> # HG changeset patch > >> # User Yuya Nishihara > >> # Date 1477199774 -32400 > >> # Sun Oct 23 14:16:14 2016 +0900 >

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-11-01 Thread Jun Wu
I think the final solution to teach the C radix tree code about what are hidden. I will take a look some time in the future. Excerpts from Yuya Nishihara's message of 2016-10-28 21:48:10 +0900: > On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:40 +0200, Pierre-Yves David wrote: > > On 10/26/2016 03:17 PM, Yuya Nishihar

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-11-01 Thread Pierre-Yves David
On 10/28/2016 02:48 PM, Yuya Nishihara wrote: On Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:31:40 +0200, Pierre-Yves David wrote: On 10/26/2016 03:17 PM, Yuya Nishihara wrote: On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:17:14 +0900, Yuya Nishihara wrote: # HG changeset patch # User Yuya Nishihara # Date 1477199774 -32400 # Sun O

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-11-01 Thread Jun Wu
Excerpts from Pierre-Yves David's message of 2016-11-01 16:59:36 +0100: > So, just to confirm, the performance impact will only show up in case > where we would have raised and ambiguity error anyway ? So in the only > behavior/performance impact we'll see is a move from an abort to a > slightly

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-11-01 Thread Pierre-Yves David
On 11/01/2016 05:17 PM, Jun Wu wrote: Excerpts from Pierre-Yves David's message of 2016-11-01 16:59:36 +0100: So, just to confirm, the performance impact will only show up in case where we would have raised and ambiguity error anyway ? So in the only behavior/performance impact we'll see is a

Re: [PATCH 3 of 3 STABLE V2] changectx: do not include hidden revisions on short node lookup (issue4964)

2016-11-02 Thread Yuya Nishihara
On Tue, 1 Nov 2016 16:17:57 +, Jun Wu wrote: > Excerpts from Pierre-Yves David's message of 2016-11-01 16:59:36 +0100: > > So, just to confirm, the performance impact will only show up in case > > where we would have raised and ambiguity error anyway ? So in the only > > behavior/performance