From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45E6D1F452 for ; Tue, 2 May 2023 21:31:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20221208 header.b=DXLSEJ5G; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229695AbjEBVbf (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 May 2023 17:31:35 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35864 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229496AbjEBVbe (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 May 2023 17:31:34 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x336.google.com (mail-ot1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::336]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 252BF1992 for ; Tue, 2 May 2023 14:31:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x336.google.com with SMTP id 46e09a7af769-6a8955b3462so1604046a34.2 for ; Tue, 02 May 2023 14:31:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1683063092; x=1685655092; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=tDuYYBbnW8KGtDIUz0d4mz3E0G354Ehca1X9zmmuip8=; b=DXLSEJ5GVZXB3Bs1YAiM7ePnJuFPfiZTLMgIGcZ5vAePKiZBeYn9+RLlbdp3GHRMVE y0M1BgeVWxYAKEoLjnMaVBRaCzljg4E7zbEPjs9WTLKE5YXUv6reOwL381v+TZOkfNIJ KoaG9StT3Qv7rp6UZXM0hxUWGwyKuIePgBBt2Ci5B0jTVuvJxLnA7FHhLxCDNLchtiND ERDxtDNcwu7dTBW4gPk4I+pwazPVrQsPQNmI5rNlINNmupWOE/DtmuUfxaIQuJxK/AC2 GglKeEMf8pIpPp9K1mLmq+zX/PAHga+7Eu5cmP9/qdmzbB243sUQ4HEvEnouDoo+tw0p 9ufA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1683063092; x=1685655092; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=tDuYYBbnW8KGtDIUz0d4mz3E0G354Ehca1X9zmmuip8=; b=Okw50dUgo3vkT+XenjU/B8jmgCzLL6/T8rdBTAtu7pB09+XAb6XdfaZn5U5WGFLECW 4DMxjdt9k2yaf99Eg4bbFau3aYigzGgmOkWTspbl0tLa03aYIhlx2XI3ygHDj2P0t7Ox HFTeF5foZjm/PtYbmVFfzVHIjH0sgBld/lUXkiH8sg3Dhms75CB351SLL61/Ne6MvBMi cg4oRLPOlXN8LyS/PeIZ14Uaqq9eFDA6dwpXyyYWrP7AFJbqDdYjKQEYuBKbApShLOn0 F79jZgxMr12EnBxZLnDRoDOkZEP4ZdAkduTtEcSWYq4qaQAL5Y16Ms84dIdNvCG0yEZb RhEQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDyxd8IdBA45zI18iW+lIkLE4oQX9/8tg9CxpqIR9NVZ5N8eevlJ 6QB4Ia0mUSi4/yum9rzQj0Y= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ6lfQfuLfMu0hd47zQti09Y3KZ5OS1ln8WDMMmpRmTeJjl+Mc77bUDXa0AjBfJqd1ibyiCdLg== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6d06:0:b0:69f:578a:d1ea with SMTP id o6-20020a9d6d06000000b0069f578ad1eamr9540976otp.32.1683063092453; Tue, 02 May 2023 14:31:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2806:2f0:4060:fff1:4ae7:daff:fe31:3285]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p21-20020a9d76d5000000b006a3df644d31sm13254907otl.37.2023.05.02.14.31.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 02 May 2023 14:31:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 02 May 2023 15:31:31 -0600 From: Felipe Contreras To: Junio C Hamano , Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Derrick Stolee Message-ID: <64518133eea7_200ae2948a@chronos.notmuch> In-Reply-To: References: <91ed8c70f22dd2c47c60d650323579fc42cc7f2d.1682380788.git.me@ttaylorr.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] pack-bitmap.c: use commit boundary during bitmap traversal Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano wrote: > Taylor Blau writes: > > Relaxing the bitmap traversal to allow it to produce over-counted > > results gives us the opportunity to make some significant improvements. > > Instead of the above, the new algorithm only has to walk from the > > *boundary* down to the nearest bitmap, instead of from each of the > > UNINTERESTING tips. > > Is it only me, or are all readers equally confused by the use of > the term "boundary" that hasn't been given any definition? > > > And is more-or-less equivalent to using the *old* algorithm with this > > invocation: > > > > $ git rev-list --objects --boundary $WANTS --not $HAVES | > > It is especially confusing because the "--boundary" (at least as I > originally had invented it), i.e. a commit that is smudged with > UNINTERESTING bit, whose parent we did not bother to dig further to > paint with the same UNINTERESTING bit, is not something we start our > computation with; it is something we learn _after_ completing the > history traversing. So I am utterly confused X-<. I don't know if it's the case, but in my mind all the `--not $HAVES` are boundaries. Some of these might be overshadowed by another boundary higher up in the topology and thus not shown, so in a sense are "uninteresting boundaries". Perhaps because you invented `--boundary` you think a "boundary" is only an interesting boundary which must be computed, and all the other are not true boundaries. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras