git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/7] Rejecting useless merge bases
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 21:23:38 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161019042345.29766-1-gitster@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqmvi2sj8f.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

This is a continuation of

    http://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqmvi2sj8f.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com

In a workflow where topic branches are first merged to the 'next'
integration branch to be tested before getting merged down to the
'master' integration branch to be consumed by the end users, merging
the 'master' branch back to the 'next' happens after topics graduate
to 'master' and release notes entries are written for them.

Git finds many merge bases between 'master' and 'next' while
creating this merge.  In addition to the tip of 'master' back when
we made such a merge back from 'master' to 'next' was made the last
time, which is the most reasonable merge base to explain the
histories of both branches, all the tips of topic branches that
graduated recently are merge bases.  Because these tips of topic
branches were already in 'next', the tip of 'next' reaches them, and
because they just graduated to 'master', the tip of 'master' reaches
them, too.  And these topics are independent most of the time (that
is the point of employing the topic-branch workflow), so they cannot
be reduced.

The merge-recursive machinery is very inefficient to compute this
merge, because it needs to create pointless virtual merge-base
commits across these many merge bases.  Conceptually, the point
where the histories of 'master' and 'next' diverged was the tip of
'master' back when we created such a merge back from 'master' to
'next' the last time, and in practice that is the only merge base
that matters.

The series allows us to ignore these tips of topics, which are
uninteresting merge bases, when running "git merge".  The example
merge with 12 merge bases:

    git checkout 4868def05e && git merge 659889482a

in our history takes about 1.22-1.33 seconds without the series,
while running the latter "git merge" with the "--fp-base-only"
option takes about 0.54-0.59 seconds.

Junio C Hamano (7):
  commit: simplify fastpath of merge-base
  sha1_name: remove ONELINE_SEEN bit
  merge-base: stop moving commits around in remove_redundant()
  merge-base: expose get_merge_bases_many_0() a bit more
  merge-base: mark bases that are on first-parent chain
  merge-base: limit the output to bases that are on first-parent chain
  merge: allow to use only the fp-only merge bases

 Documentation/git-merge-base.txt |  8 +++-
 Documentation/merge-options.txt  |  9 +++++
 builtin/merge-base.c             | 10 +++--
 builtin/merge.c                  | 15 ++++++--
 commit.c                         | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
 commit.h                         |  7 +++-
 object.h                         |  3 +-
 sha1_name.c                      | 10 ++---
 8 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)

-- 
2.10.1-631-gb2c64dcf30


  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-19  4:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-17 22:28 [RFD] should all merge bases be equal? Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 1/7] commit: simplify fastpath of merge-base computation Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 2/7] sha1_name: remove ONELINE_SEEN bit Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 3/7] merge-base: stop moving commits around in remove_redundant() Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 4/7] merge-base: expose get_merge_bases_many_0() a bit more Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 5/7] merge-base: mark bases that are on first-parent chain Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19 17:42     ` Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 6/7] merge-base: limit the output to " Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19  4:23   ` [PATCH 7/7] merge: allow to use only the fp-only merge bases Junio C Hamano
2016-10-19 21:34   ` [PATCH 0/7] Rejecting useless " Junio C Hamano
2017-02-09 14:44 ` [RFD] should all merge bases be equal? Michael Haggerty
2017-02-09 16:57   ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20161019042345.29766-1-gitster@pobox.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).