From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] refs: remove lookup cache for reference-transaction hook
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 10:59:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200822085951.GB1069@ncase.pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200821143727.GA3241139@coredump.intra.peff.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3119 bytes --]
On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:37:27AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 10:29:18AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
>
> > One case notably absent from those benchmarks is a single executable
> > searching for the hook hundreds of times, which is exactly the case for
> > which the negative cache was added. p1400.2 will spawn a new update-ref
> > for each transaction and p1400.3 only has a single reference-transaction
> > for all reference updates. So this commit adds a third benchmark, which
> > performs an non-atomic push of a thousand references. This will create a
> > new reference transaction per reference. But even for this case, the
> > negative cache doesn't consistently improve performance:
>
> Ah, right, I forgot that update-ref would use one single transaction. So
> what we were testing in our earlier discussion was not even useful. :)
>
> > test_expect_success "setup" '
> > + git init --bare target-repo.git &&
> > test_commit PRE &&
> > test_commit POST &&
> > printf "create refs/heads/%d PRE\n" $(test_seq 1000) >create &&
> > printf "update refs/heads/%d POST PRE\n" $(test_seq 1000) >update &&
> > - printf "delete refs/heads/%d POST\n" $(test_seq 1000) >delete
> > + printf "delete refs/heads/%d POST\n" $(test_seq 1000) >delete &&
> > + printf "create refs/heads/branch-%d PRE\n" $(test_seq 1000) | git update-ref --stdin
> > '
>
> OK, we need these new branches to have something to push into and delete
> from the remote. They might impact the timings of the other tests,
> though (since we now have 1000 entries in .git/refs/heads/, which might
> affect filesystem performance). But it should do so uniformly, so I
> don't think it invalidates their results.
>
> However, I wondered...
>
> > +test_perf "nonatomic push" '
> > + git push ./target-repo.git branch-{1..1000} &&
> > + git push --delete ./target-repo.git branch-{1..1000}
> > +'
>
> ...if it might make the test more consistent (not to mention isolated
> from the cost of other parts of the push) if we used update-ref here, as
> well. You added the code necessary to control individual transactions,
> so I thought that:
>
> printf 'start\ncreate refs/heads/%d PRE\ncommit\n' \
> $(test_seq 1000) >create-transaction
>
> might work. But it doesn't, because after the first transaction is
> closed, we refuse to accept any other commands. That makes sense for
> "prepare", etc, but there's no reason we couldn't start a new one.
>
> Is that worth supporting? It would allow a caller to use a single
> update-ref to make a series of non-atomic updates, which is something
> that can't currently be done. And we're so close.
Yeah, I had the exact same thought and I do think it's useful to be able
to create multiple reference transactions per git-update-ref(1) session.
I might whip something up as soon as I find the time to do so, it really
shouldn't be a lot of work.
Patrick
> Even if it is, though, that's definitely outside the scope of this
> patch, and I think we should take it as-is with "push".
>
> -Peff
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-22 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-21 8:29 [PATCH] refs: remove lookup cache for reference-transaction hook Patrick Steinhardt
2020-08-21 14:37 ` Jeff King
2020-08-21 16:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-21 17:21 ` Jeff King
2020-08-22 9:02 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2020-08-22 8:59 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2020-08-25 10:35 ` [PATCH v2] " Patrick Steinhardt
2020-08-25 15:10 ` Jeff King
2020-08-25 18:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-08-25 18:29 ` Jeff King
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=20200822085951.GB1069@ncase.pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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).