From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 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_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA531F597 for ; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 07:11:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727304AbeGUIBA (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2018 04:01:00 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f195.google.com ([209.85.223.195]:37603 "EHLO mail-io0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727162AbeGUIA7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2018 04:00:59 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f195.google.com with SMTP id z19-v6so11664279ioh.4 for ; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:09:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=N6jCkAzgNs2khZBps9k+9ScZVi60USqdFJm0T2RxxGk=; b=VsM8VdTxw28z4Q9cfiAp6F/kXE3EKcvuKLQulliyzb4BfddeRG/jJrIwLAHlLBkx7Y A0WFEx4zPiOcVqaLcrg3ICG/tvkVMVby5rR7HBiHHRlSeAq3CURWL+8ETifIokt3oWDI xkfiHLfIZcLsqgHyJJsqxmkhor39NJz+5ow9NzJ1w5T/wSmS2LxQrhU9y2viHm9gATrT 4IMzWuE+i9H7QMewd4sHapOjSkFw5p8VfBCNxpM0b24KGgRn9zxra00quzrm6yvw+n91 9dxLA6XksUN/gxVXNMRb4wgOk7QUi7ViB3v8LkqCcNrh70WDWteDlFFi2wtakM81p9x1 Mkzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=N6jCkAzgNs2khZBps9k+9ScZVi60USqdFJm0T2RxxGk=; b=NtIcsbVpwoJjCtG8awleqczoES5OO6BmxHQvdRCLnCt1++pT2kCniIfKvVvhejJn3P S9P9encf6KBdZyISbZFXUx/kspeQA1RSj2AIJvWbUxq5UxXWkMJulbXR5ikuKhFyL7Q3 UHrUElT424oa5KYTUtsLAoLqsfsqzNurmdb6eCLJeTKYW66YNvB+tmI4diPzjQRv3IsH 2w27HQISOcSqyOkkkbgP36GSmrkch/pohkWur6/6LarzBJSgxYvLwIBZR6SfLI60GTwD 9clIKdbVjM+jmZ3gg8f5h/uj52vLt/zDDQ5p5KKyHaoVlUVmHLKqXE1mGokkJgsV8yM8 OtJA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEDag4M203sqUNU9zm168TKtzyfw7OhhFDToE8bDMtlNSB8w5Es ejYNMozMZBcxhI1KSKwQYJ9rnvSS83wYRXCLUADzU3Li X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpe3O6lcZXmH+sWFBy9ccMUk0c8OdN73DRgY47xpjFmyCUux0tdQCTQ9cm5E5Agr3fMjfHWdD61vT44OjQiEY90= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:a2cf:: with SMTP id l198-v6mr3562079ioe.282.1532156958885; Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:09:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180718225110.17639-1-newren@gmail.com> <20180720153943.575-1-pclouds@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Duy Nguyen Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2018 09:08:52 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-objects: fix performance issues on packing large deltas To: Elijah Newren Cc: Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , Jeff King Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 6:07 AM Duy Nguyen wrote: > > However, I'm just concentrating on a beefy machine; it may be that v6 > > drastically outperforms v2 on weaker hardware? Can others measure a > > lower memory usage for v6 than v2? > > I'll try it with massif on linux.git, but this is a very weak laptop > (4GB) so it'll take a while.... OK massif reports are too big to upload so I only pastebin'd the peak memory snapshot. fix-v2 uses 1.449 MB [1] (M = 1000) while my patch uses 1.394 MB heap. The actual saving if we focus on packlist_alloc() is 599,147,916B - 544,691,628B = roughly 50 MB or 8%. It's not _that_ big saving, so if your test runs do not show significant speedups, then fix-v2 is probably a better option. [1] https://pastebin.com/8iDcm9M4 [2] https://pastebin.com/bXBjzPvN -- Duy