Re: [PATCH 1/3] revision: complicated pathspecs disable filters

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 02:25:48PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > THIS IS A BREAKING CHANGE. Commit-graph files with changed-path
> > Bloom filters computed by a previous commit will not be compatible
> > with the filters computed in this commit, nor will we get correct
> > results when testing across these incompatible versions. Normally,
> > this would be a completely unacceptable change, but the filters
> > have not been released and hence are still possible to update
> > before release.
>
> Sure, it hasn't even hit 'next' yet.
>
> But I think we are both sort-of leaning towards concluding that it
> does not help all that much.  So I think it is OK.

Yeah, I think that the only thing that it is potentially helping is the
:(icase) magic. In a repository that doesn't have colliding paths in
case-insensitive filesystems (i.e., having both 'foo' and 'FOO' in the
same tree), this doesn't seem to be obviously hurting anything.

But, it is at least semi-harmful to repositories that do have such
trees, since we now can't answer "probably yes" or "definitely not" for
colliding paths unless both produce the same fingerprint. That seems
like a clear downside.

Now, how common is that against people who would benefit from
changed-path Bloom filters in their commit-graphs? I don't know one way
or the other. But, the upside seems to be minimal compared to the
potential cost, so I think that it may be better to just leave this one
alone.

> > TODO: If we decide to move in this direction, then the following
> > steps should be done (and some of them should be done anyway):
>
> Even if we decide not to do this "downcase before hashing" thing, we
> should document how exactly we compute, I think.
>
> And if we decide do change our mind later, it is not the end of the
> world.  We should be able to use a different chunk type to store the
> filters computed over downcased paths.
>
> > * We need to document the Bloom filter format to specify exactly
> >   how we compute the filter data. The details should be careful
> >   enough that someone can reproduce the exact file format without
> >   looking at the C code.
> >
> > * That document would include the tolower() transformation that is
> >   being done here.
>
> As the tree-diff comparison done internally while running "git
> blame" does not take an end-user specified pathspec in any
> meaningful way, this does not matter in practice, but there is
> another possible complication we would want to consider when we
> extend the support to "git log" and friends---negative pathspecs
> (e.g. "git log ':(exclude)COPYING'").  A commit that cannot possibly
> have touched the COPYING file would be eligible for output without
> actually running tree-diff between it and its parent (as long as the
> trees of the two commits are different, we know it must be shown).
>
> Thanks.

Thanks,
Taylor