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-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,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 BC6141F4B4 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:15:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726960AbhAMPOf (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:14:35 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46692 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725846AbhAMPOf (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:14:35 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F5A5C061575 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:13:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id b9so1284458qtr.2 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:13:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=xCcm3kzcMqA3+/d9MJawRbZzOvUQeLhWUA/0VrrPr7c=; b=VJup71t6H3zLGpiS1v3emcxkes3mY3ukg06+qlEdmz5aw9fBgTUeO8W+8brzsyuktl zGmNfllLjDf5oGmLqx61AVNjZZRKYEc1qBxSeV4r0pnkOtfCSYv5CHCShHYJRfnzPzRd Z+54m1OENmKOjG8cCyLEPWReittfZlJEglelJ0PppVof6kstdxKzg9CS+GCYiuuSyY07 DxJfPNZ3kpzhp5dkDRkpWcq2zLrBdMtjbCpujs/kaNI7vf4X71L2YuJK1AyWjzuEj2MQ u65dYlFpXZgq9bVJDs+JIyGok31vSlnG9Wz3YaKTCbk8Uvko6JNqxTBbw72ygyCT17fA 8FEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=xCcm3kzcMqA3+/d9MJawRbZzOvUQeLhWUA/0VrrPr7c=; b=PSI7I7XSFrwh2rnatINUjoi4thOhNweLceP84EDCdzGsdvpnzwSgJrGxQHnRe1l3dX R8JHsUXgHURFIbYLSx4U6aNQZl66bA7oNZhSeCswKwN59zA80zKWbl3w0MU67/XR1wT3 Av7vHmFxyNQfS2NqHukEes1LopFgjwosgQMmIwazoyWu3sD/Yfs+XWs4prZ28UsQMbtc BSKzpcjYnJg8Hp/7tTNpz9s5yzCUim4k0SK23/GQcNc1qPX1aYFGZ+mBoN7Hm6Sv1lvG bVRqNHgiR34IwbWb4eKUy8rY4G/vlHhP5zq2+snU65Dsa1SNS8lJVRBOXvUa1OdVVpQ3 3QTg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531MBqvDKrQdPUg8JfjOJR1sNago2b4AvCe8ZXVT7dd8IqMSTzUz K6KvG5hGp1JZGtL4EBRLt4PXvhqm9RzoSw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyXSStNqFm88Q18PfftFGnlqGRXBaFJySgZrkg/1QTRaDTnBf2gi/o00/kk8eT8bYKRVwdSbA== X-Received: by 2002:aed:232d:: with SMTP id h42mr2676007qtc.143.1610550834054; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:13:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2605:9480:22e:ff10:f17c:3911:cace:ed91]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a35sm1072771qtk.82.2021.01.13.07.13.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 13 Jan 2021 07:13:53 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:13:50 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: =?utf-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: test-tool: bloom: generate_filter for multiple string? Message-ID: References: <20201231035438.22533-1-congdanhqx@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 06:59:52PM +0700, Đoàn Trần Công Danh wrote: > On 2021-01-12 14:53:32-0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 10:54:38AM +0700, Đoàn Trần Công Danh wrote: > > > I'm reading the code for Bloom Filter to see if arXiv:2012.00472 > > > could be an improvement. > > > > I'm late to the party, but I'm curious to hear which part of this > > article you think would help out the Bloom filter implementation. > > Uhm, no. The article doesn't help the Bloom filter implementation. > The article was suggesting using Bloom filter to speed-up the > negotiation in fetch-pack and upload-pack. Which, in my own quick > experience, doesn't help much. Maybe it's me not understand the > article idea or I have made a naive implementation. However, I'm not > convinced to pursued further. I see. I read your "reading the code for Bloom Filter to see if ... could be an improvement" as trying to improve the Bloom implementation. Which after skimming the article, made me quite curious, since I didn't understand what you were getting at. But trying to speed up the negotiation makes sense, and is in line with the goal of the article. It's too bad that you weren't able to produce the same benefits here, but I understand why. > If you are curious, I'm attaching 2 quick-and-low-quality patches with > this email for your consideration. Thanks. They were an interesting read. Thanks, Taylor