From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 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,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 509E61F8C6 for ; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 13:48:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232241AbhGANvC (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:51:02 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52166 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232085AbhGANvA (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jul 2021 09:51:00 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x533.google.com (mail-ed1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::533]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 712A0C061762 for ; Thu, 1 Jul 2021 06:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x533.google.com with SMTP id i5so8579971eds.1 for ; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 06:48:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version; bh=Pd8TnySGfEQesi9JMX8hJ5HYjd//Q4NDTQt5QahJHZ4=; b=MFZkjOiCaFVQHHnXxCasGupDywiqPbm37LFVmqrQf7suCregl2VW0xVny4i/Q/NyBI sbY8fXA5fJeHM3t/8AZMEKJZfmBhBICuH8qVYzxMCgu7f7kaGSCdnTo+WhtmiM2L/ApO uaD23skSSKjTcXh14h/aigd3LoriZzIV8YKbFlI8bIxKE3wmHp0DYVhib7czf1RVkHeI qfYtSl6VS8JsOkVw3kFzJwS+cwf7DanIz0Z8rB8ei2ZRqsIrXeMDLwZwu14KrTNlmZv1 k2JDdS9w3CvBiM8CVK2ig0onLIIoumdKU1Eoc+ixO/tktOQCeuRkPfaNB126omtqbFuJ 1qhQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:references:user-agent :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version; bh=Pd8TnySGfEQesi9JMX8hJ5HYjd//Q4NDTQt5QahJHZ4=; b=nSZjZvwmjHqokNG1qNJcWA3GnuzJ3+cxoRfNMxlb/Bsfq7eUhJYbqW+OsLCxisFXnd p+hvHt7qO3JNvJC0QX9KgM9v7/EWRkmbaOisfUJIOLhJ+ZFXaMkV4HJoHmB2jurSi12H YuuiYo8Yne9gim6i4JJCO3BNt4fW7dGJe5ilDiLmLWnBeEzFmA+ZN8JtCo/ArGi5vnt8 rpmk8BR+o3vNJoCU7Scb5cppJvm68FCbIsHtI/h6Y0AXw3qUz70HVbyorumdWauPIh1Y tbEeBP2TPrF6CjY/DQ35l8pMQofwTesZ5rBc3AbxdLAVgZ+u8QtI8mK9J4QAFvvUcEkZ mSZA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Z9/RemKpuP/qi14mwxQ2fFhr93obSLOaMrHiM5IfeeSAS92AW mk1Xlq2yJBVY/6BEkG+hq2g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz4pLV5Onf4MdBdo5WiwFGOGU1bp0sL0D2pBi2GCjlsadNLfLQvrILhYuO8bnH6m8tPi617jQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:458:: with SMTP id p24mr28489599edw.142.1625147307851; Thu, 01 Jul 2021 06:48:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from evledraar (j57224.upc-j.chello.nl. [24.132.57.224]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n22sm2560705eje.3.2021.07.01.06.48.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 01 Jul 2021 06:48:27 -0700 (PDT) From: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Jeff Hostetler , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2021, #07; Wed, 30) Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 15:42:23 +0200 References: User-agent: Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye); Emacs 27.1; mu4e 1.5.13 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87r1gicfh1.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 30 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote: > * jh/builtin-fsmonitor (2021-05-24) 30 commits > - t/perf: avoid copying builtin fsmonitor files into test repo > - t7527: test status with untracked-cache and fsmonitor--daemon > - p7519: add fsmonitor--daemon > - t7527: create test for fsmonitor--daemon > - fsmonitor: force update index after large responses > - fsmonitor: enhance existing comments > - fsmonitor--daemon: use a cookie file to sync with file system > - fsmonitor--daemon: periodically truncate list of modified files > - fsmonitor--daemon: implement handle_client callback > - fsmonitor-fs-listen-macos: implement FSEvent listener on MacOS > - fsmonitor-fs-listen-macos: add macos header files for FSEvent > - fsmonitor-fs-listen-win32: implement FSMonitor backend on Windows > - fsmonitor--daemon: create token-based changed path cache > - fsmonitor--daemon: define token-ids > - fsmonitor--daemon: add pathname classification > - fsmonitor--daemon: implement daemon command options > - fsmonitor-fs-listen-macos: stub in backend for MacOS > - fsmonitor-fs-listen-win32: stub in backend for Windows > - t/helper/fsmonitor-client: create IPC client to talk to FSMonitor Daemon > - fsmonitor--daemon: implement client command options > - fsmonitor--daemon: add a built-in fsmonitor daemon > - fsmonitor: introduce `core.useBuiltinFSMonitor` to call the daemon via IPC > - config: FSMonitor is repository-specific > - help: include fsmonitor--daemon feature flag in version info > - fsmonitor-ipc: create client routines for git-fsmonitor--daemon > - fsmonitor--daemon: update fsmonitor documentation > - fsmonitor--daemon: man page > - simple-ipc: preparations for supporting binary messages. > - Merge branch 'jk/perf-in-worktrees' into HEAD > - Merge branch 'jh/simple-ipc' into jh/rfc-builtin-fsmonitor > > An attempt to write and ship with a watchman equivalent tailored > for our use. > > What's the status of this one? I think Johannes's reply to the last WC applies[1]: I am not Jeff, but I know that he is busy getting back to it, and plans on submitting a third iteration. FWIW I'm still curious about some details on the performance concerns that seem to have prompted this built-in fsmonitor endeavor, as I asked about (but didn't get a reply to) in [2]. Not as a "we shouldn't have this, let's keep using the hook", but just curiosity about why we've seemingly gotten such different performance numbers on the watchman hook v.s. a built-in approach. I suspect (but don't know) that the reason is that the built-in is perhaps integrating differently with git somehow, in a way that we could retrofit the hook approach to also do (if anyone still cares about the hook approach). In any case I'm interested in *why* the new approach is faster, given that I've done some testing (again, noted in [2]) that suggest that bottleneck in the previous pipeline wasn't at all what Jeff H. thought it was. 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2106171135530.57@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet/#t 2. https://lore.kernel.org/git/87h7lgfchm.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/