git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pack-objects: fix performance issues on packing large deltas
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:30:40 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180723213040.GA7870@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8Cex0Uby-eBRBqc_ScZd=EnCV6e0ZuaZEmopGkrvhrBzQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 08:49:59PM +0200, Duy Nguyen wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 8:38 PM Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I will have to study the thread dispatch code more to have a better
> > answer, unfortunately.
> 
> Well.. I thought I would need this weekend for this, but a quick look
> and ll_find_deltas() suggests that what we're doing is safe. At least
> you and Jeff are way to familiar with the delta window concept in
> pack-objects. So in multithread mode, we have a big list of all
> objects, then the list is cut in N sublists and each is owned entirely
> by one thread. Each thread then can slide a window over this sublist
> to search for the best delta.
> 
> Because of this partitioning, if trg_entry is being processed now, it
> will not be accessed by any other thread. It's owned by this thread
> and will be accessed again as src_entry when the next entry becomes
> the delta target in the same thread. As long as we don't access
> objects of another thread (and my v1 violates this) we should be ok.

Yes, that matches my knowledge of how this all works. And if it didn't,
I think the code would have been racy even _before_ your patches.

The only thing that this pack->delta_size approach is changing is that
managing that array needs to happen under lock, because it touches the
whole list.

And as long as we back-fill it from any arbitrary e->delta_size_, that
means that touching e->delta_size_ needs to be done under lock. That's
why I think keeping the individual valid flag in each entry makes the
most sense. Then whenever we overflow a particular e->delta_size_, we
don't have to care about anybody else's size.

Which I think is what your v2 patch is doing.

-Peff

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-23 21:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-18 22:51 2.18.0 Regression: packing performance and effectiveness Elijah Newren
2018-07-18 22:51 ` [RFC PATCH] fix-v1: revert "pack-objects: shrink delta_size field in struct object_entry" Elijah Newren
2018-07-18 22:51 ` [RFC PATCH] fix-v2: make OE_DELTA_SIZE_BITS a bit bigger Elijah Newren
2018-07-19  5:41 ` 2.18.0 Regression: packing performance and effectiveness Duy Nguyen
2018-07-19  5:49   ` Jeff King
2018-07-19 15:27   ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-19 15:43     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-19  5:44 ` Jeff King
2018-07-19  5:57   ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-19 15:16     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-19 16:42       ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-19 17:23         ` Jeff King
2018-07-19 17:31           ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-19 18:24             ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-19 19:17               ` Jeff King
2018-07-19 23:11               ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-20  5:28                 ` Jeff King
2018-07-20  5:30                   ` Jeff King
2018-07-20  5:47                   ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-20 17:21                   ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-19 17:04       ` Jeff King
2018-07-19 19:25       ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-19 19:27         ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-20 15:39 ` [PATCH] pack-objects: fix performance issues on packing large deltas Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-07-20 17:40   ` Jeff King
2018-07-21  4:23     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-23 21:37       ` Jeff King
2018-07-20 17:43   ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-20 23:52     ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-21  4:07       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-21  7:08         ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-21  4:47     ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-21  6:56       ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-21  7:14         ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-22  6:22       ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-22  6:49         ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-23 12:34     ` Elijah Newren
2018-07-23 15:50       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-22  8:04   ` [PATCH v2] " Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2018-07-23 18:04     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-23 18:38       ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-23 18:49         ` Duy Nguyen
2018-07-23 21:30           ` Jeff King [this message]
2018-07-26  8:12     ` Johannes Sixt

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=20180723213040.GA7870@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
    /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).