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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,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 5C9CB1F452 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2023 19:01:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20221208 header.b=Te1S7ErN; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235104AbjDYTBe (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Apr 2023 15:01:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60272 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235102AbjDYTBb (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Apr 2023 15:01:31 -0400 Received: from mail-yw1-x1133.google.com (mail-yw1-x1133.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1133]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C05249D8 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2023 12:01:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x1133.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-54fb8a8a597so73467257b3.0 for ; Tue, 25 Apr 2023 12:01:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1682449289; x=1685041289; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6alnOgxEllLjdSk1JmIG5dm9e8s7i+HbC7ac7TzrP7U=; b=Te1S7ErN6KjsVMR7WComJd6BLE+DXLsFOkzx/Ze0s3Tpq+UVJT8CxAKe3XrPPBe9No 3DJ+dvMiXdQuti6A8ne++FxxDrVrVfHxgVauOz/c0zUFTVpBZk25iDuP1Owu/5ePiUQh Mfziv4X0N3P3fTS8Box5uS4nXI9pYVeZHpqymbMLl9lP420dOPuxfUwLLAB2mD19Wzn7 KwYCbqaLt1ebsUWEz/NrWaqO5XmkqllSRWGLVwYdDrrqAKNRiE73E31IgmlQlPCotFGu gxyqDqavp1D+/CfdBOlr/22MXMxpAlPcSg25jJYmrU39CMChTYhMous8D+CIetIZvEK1 jt+Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682449289; x=1685041289; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=6alnOgxEllLjdSk1JmIG5dm9e8s7i+HbC7ac7TzrP7U=; b=g9ZEBoqM9KqHbXqrzhjEqjaVyQvF/QVhoVuy3vJ8J8pjfXu2zDfbvqSVolOs9Rsvxh 3IJQ/lftudSPvSSSk9iMu3cs3MpBwpzzvtagQ5wmEXgDdW+3DIdxNC4ye7GnBWtimYJN DbAl4RAaF1Y9lm6G+vvpLJTlbqHqCxgTXPXMSHXfgs1Yu6otVaRq6ncMG710ooW4FgGY CX8w9jbtp4d35Gl72ODY+cH8b+3iL/6mWufCMC7NQQdPPhMzJHTd9UTZfeSmVzUdp9wY lRmLcpfCZ+IrHtl2veqsitMeDozZBwd3n786QO7l8Ir6k3tjAbmULsQFOy/V2sSj5n/z kdfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9dbh+TgHxovdudH6+s4QliYaM7i5P/CV1mSCb5ao5aukX7AgMxW ufz6XlM6lDDM0eOPq/VjEobYlw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bds9UPmO0uoWQj/r604SkodzyEEqoAam0YjVT95rbeur50/hyQAubAWCn130ontAQfX4B+nA== X-Received: by 2002:a25:1fd6:0:b0:b8f:53ec:ac03 with SMTP id f205-20020a251fd6000000b00b8f53ecac03mr13818479ybf.34.1682449289538; Tue, 25 Apr 2023 12:01:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k184-20020a2524c1000000b00b8ed4e15acbsm3593634ybk.63.2023.04.25.12.01.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 25 Apr 2023 12:01:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 15:01:28 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Derrick Stolee Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff King , Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] pack-bitmap: boundary-based bitmap traversal Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 02:06:25PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > In other words: this generates something closer to the object set in the > non-bitmapped object walk. The only difference is that the new bitmapped > algorithm will see objects that were re-introduced across the boundary > (say, a blob was reverted to its older mode). Very well put, thank you. > For my curiosity, and since you already have a test environment set up, > could you redo the "without bitmaps" case with pack.useSparse true and > false? When the option was created and defaulted to true, we never > really explored comparing it to the bitmap case. In fact, I assumed the > bitmap case was faster in important cases like this (where there is a > substantial difference in object counts), but your data is surprising me > that the sparse algorithm is outperforming bitmaps, even with this new > algorithm. > > The main question I'd like to ask is: is pack.useSparse contributing > in an important way to the performance here? I don't know enough about pack.useSparse to say with certainty, but trying again on the same repository (which is reasonably well-packed at the moment), they appear about the same: $ time git -c pack.useSparse=false rev-list --count --objects master \ --not --exclude=master --branches 14 real 0m0.986s user 0m0.599s sys 0m0.387s $ time git -c pack.useSparse=true rev-list --count --objects master \ --not --exclude=master --branches 14 real 0m0.985s user 0m0.600s sys 0m0.385s > I'll go poking into the patches now. Thanks in advance for your review :-). Thanks, Taylor