From: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
To: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2024, #01; Tue, 2)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2024 23:59:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240225225918.GB1940392@szeder.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZabpBHBB1TXIXJLr@nand.local>
On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 03:37:24PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
> Hi Gábor,
>
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2024 at 12:41:34AM +0100, SZEDER Gábor wrote:
> > > In any case, here's the patch on top (with a lightly modified version of
> > > the test you wrote in <20230830200218.GA5147@szeder.dev>:
> >
> > I certainly hope that I'm just misunderstanding, and you don't
> > actually imply that this one test in its current form would qualify as
> > thorough testing... :)
>
> I hear what you're saying, though I think that the interesting behavior
> that would be most likely to regress is the transition between different
> Bloom filter settings/hash-version across split commit-graph layers.
>
> We have extensive tests on either "side" of this transition for both v1
> and v2 Bloom filters, so I'm not sure what we'd want to add there. Like
> I said, the transition is the primary (previously-)untested area of this
> code that I would want to ensure is covered to protect against
> regressions.
>
> I think that the most recent round of this series accomplishes that
> goal.
It's great that we finally have test cases for different Bloom filter
settings in different commit-graph layers, including a test case that
merges those layers, but that test case doesn't check that the
resulting merged commit-graph file contains the right settings. And
there is still no test case that merges layers with different Bloom
filter versions.
I think adding these would be the bare minimum... and would need more
for due diligence.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-25 22:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-03 1:02 What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2024, #01; Tue, 2) Junio C Hamano
2024-01-03 5:53 ` ps/refstorage-extension (was: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2024, #01; Tue, 2)) Patrick Steinhardt
2024-01-03 9:01 ` What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2024, #01; Tue, 2) Jeff King
2024-01-03 16:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-01-05 8:59 ` Jeff King
2024-01-05 16:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-01-03 17:14 ` René Scharfe
2024-01-03 16:43 ` Taylor Blau
2024-01-03 18:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-01-13 18:35 ` SZEDER Gábor
2024-01-13 22:06 ` Taylor Blau
2024-01-13 23:41 ` SZEDER Gábor
2024-01-16 20:37 ` Taylor Blau
2024-02-25 22:59 ` SZEDER Gábor [this message]
2024-02-26 14:44 ` Taylor Blau
2024-01-13 22:51 ` SZEDER Gábor
2024-01-16 20:49 ` Taylor Blau
2024-01-16 22:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-01-16 23:31 ` Taylor Blau
2024-01-16 23:42 ` 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=20240225225918.GB1940392@szeder.dev \
--to=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.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).