From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: What's in git.git (stable) Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:05:40 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <7v8x27iui1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vd4r24ox6.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vir0o44mt.fsf_-_@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vtzk7xqg3.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7v3arrxd7q.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080218014301.GA6642@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Junio C Hamano , Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 18 03:06:33 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JQvOo-00080S-0o for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2008 03:06:30 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752409AbYBRCFv (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:05:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752483AbYBRCFv (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:05:51 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:41773 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752349AbYBRCFu (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:05:50 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2008 02:05:48 -0000 Received: from host86-138-198-40.range86-138.btcentralplus.com (EHLO racer.home) [86.138.198.40] by mail.gmx.net (mp054) with SMTP; 18 Feb 2008 03:05:48 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18p4R4VCz0pbdOMp0WSfSVxRgE9tvdD4Q1eE5FWUl KBx9BanhSrz+Ii X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <20080218014301.GA6642@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:34:50AM +0000, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Well, my workflow has lots of these moments. I do not even feel "oops" > > about it. More like "by the way, this needs committing _now_". > > > > So I guess I'll be the guinea pig for this patch, and if it is too > > painful, I'll just go and fix it. > > Just to be clear, this patch discards the cache after preparing the > partial index but before doing the status. This is in contrast to the > current 'master' and v1.5.4, which discard the cache _three_ times > during the status process. ... but then goes through big pains to reconstruct an index that needs as little updating as possible. > So no, the performance will probably not be a big deal. It is better > than it has been in any released version of git. I'll see, and report back. IOW I think that your patch is necessary. There might be some followup work to do for me, but at the moment, your patch fixes an existing bug. Ciao, Dscho