From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23A221F487 for ; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 23:25:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390129AbgDBXZX (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2020 19:25:23 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:55542 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387919AbgDBXZX (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2020 19:25:23 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6B8CE35E; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 19:25:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=vPxbQBQY5t7RUmr8KxAs6IFYIcM=; b=IJDG9S Bp2HKhdi5OZgjYkNawVG5MqzJyjczfKJfY0pDJHR7Z1AoZkX/osaeIjwQo+df9E8 MMxTAoOrgipwA5kQM/SYMslEX1rKaCBLH3sxrZNk51pjPPGJkcTtLZdXUB1zpWeS MprGkdoRvT1hbCPqn9UAyJV6JuXOU+5gvdb0E= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=tisBQP3yGV9v9fh4GSW5JgLC2YuUIJ89 mUof6rS0ZR90GFmeKUXnHcVJN0J4wjgu+2MZg0xqk1zohFY4hrUqNi6EtjfN1duq 9z1YDVRCdS3y6a5aFOMi/RdaXl/TUFwEJyErGi5yXfjDNVW41Ly/9HD5KjY0wQfY nDZFhrLuiAA= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030CDCE35D; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 19:25:21 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 480BECE35C; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 19:25:18 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, stolee@gmail.com, peff@peff.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] diff: restrict when prefetching occurs References: <20200402230937.47323-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 16:25:16 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200402230937.47323-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Thu, 2 Apr 2020 16:09:37 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 36E9B314-7539-11EA-B34A-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Tan writes: >> This comment makes me wonder if it would be even better to >> >> - prepare an empty to_fetch OID array in the caller, >> >> - if the output format is one of the ones that wants prefetch, add >> object names to to_fetch in the caller, BUT not fetch there. >> >> - pass &to_fetch by the caller to this function, and this code here >> may add even more objects, >> >> - then do the prefetch here (so a single promisor interaction will >> grab objects the caller would have fetched before calling us and >> the ones we want here), and then clear the to_fetch array. >> >> - the caller, after seeing this function returns, checks to_fetch >> and if it is not empty, fetches (i.e. the caller prepared list of >> objects based on the output type, we ended up not calling this >> helper, and then finally the caller does the prefetch). >> >> That way, the "unless we have already prefetched" logic can go, and >> we can lose one indentation level, no? > > This means that the only prefetch occurs in diffcore_rename()? No, but I phrased the last bullet item incorrectly. "after seeing this function returns" is wrong, but what is in parentheses (i.e. if we didn't call diffcore_rename) is correct. > I don't > think this will work for 2 reasons: > > - diffcore_std() calls diffcore_break() (which also reads blobs) before > diffcore_rename() Ahh, I missed that part. > - (more importantly) there's a code path in diffcore_std() that does > not call diffcore_rename(), so we would still need some prefetching > logic in diffcore_std() in case diffcore_rename() is not called That one I think is already covered.