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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE1B1F5AD for ; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 14:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727072AbgDIOAu (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:00:50 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-f193.google.com ([209.85.222.193]:39451 "EHLO mail-qk1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726895AbgDIOAu (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:00:50 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-f193.google.com with SMTP id b62so3984767qkf.6 for ; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:00:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ApaCQKx7CZdFlWDKB13ttZxTsxuJqaft205MmTyrxvo=; b=WLSBKpZLJXS8gPjrBRJmxPSJuDiZuDsVSev4rNVwjJztSkJmmTvVXF+1cRugEjpKF+ qegBz03zQ/Lm9MyeLsDnFT3v6dhR3gJ4U73icd7EqXv3xhOchDJ26qJCmsW4thwXrjsQ 1VBaVOsgoxFjx0dg7kBzrRoI1wn81286q5DMS5J47Jv9u6VgXBnAuNd5XOu5Fsly+R/9 vSMocPZTKeaPCyFA4ckKrioVbqS+UoOKxOB8b+KcWjLhGSyiTxx8CubQEwIVUnGn8gmE qi36XtqCIh6b+yybmfzaXzaoosNUjgwBebhzeTUtQdxyRSv+/o9Svd08f6a6HAw6tQ95 3bww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ApaCQKx7CZdFlWDKB13ttZxTsxuJqaft205MmTyrxvo=; b=VblG6UgvgmHa0quR3cOXoeSTxAGwz17/bn+iN9L1ubgGZTj9+CmVmuCxRpdCfKTT4i vnsMNSbqZqnvOMelQzcnjrIzFVs/5UbsfwH+79Pjze/PdPL5zAg7g9WT8RS1LlZnWgCz 0KHRT3bzleLc4BBIHyp7Eeuhl78dWWjDTP+VL457UAr0zqfCyGUINUApSOYO3YVY/V9q YYGMsTMaOVnrwONj155KB5XpOPclihzn1MiCxLfaH5Q56KG+6GjJXWyR4xRdlFMtRrb6 dL0Fgz9KLDCdd2hwxQvN8h9F4xkc21aMsosiKgYc1AyqvykjE1DWQlXxwweZNOaaLf3+ DlpQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubHvm4MC5KyvoP1rJZitVHKradQUSvxMo+AkeqQB30vArli1bjc wF6rT5KO2424+FCllu+zgb0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIkt/yBGe0fQNns6qr11c3sEbkmv6rD8uUAlzMcWsYwpoFXit6JhhOoA57u7636hfF7DEA1WA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:55d:: with SMTP id o29mr13146688qko.305.1586440849669; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.83] ([99.85.27.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v187sm21731737qkc.29.2020.04.09.07.00.48 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Apr 2020 07:00:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] bloom: ignore renames when computing changed paths To: Jeff King Cc: Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee , Philip Oakley References: <20200408223111.GC3468797@coredump.intra.peff.net> <72fa2e30-b841-9600-ae2c-21a269817f1c@gmail.com> <20200409134724.GA3494212@coredump.intra.peff.net> From: Derrick Stolee Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 10:00:46 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:75.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/75.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200409134724.GA3494212@coredump.intra.peff.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 4/9/2020 9:47 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 07:56:43AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > >>> So we really aren't detecting renames in the first place! And indeed, >>> checking diffopt.detect_rename shows that it is unset. So I'm curious if >>> there is a case where that would not be true. I _think_ it would only be >>> true in a program which ran init_diff_ui_defaults(), but never in >>> git-commit-graph. >> >> So our issue was really that the partial clone prefetch logic was just >> overly aggressive. > > Right, but I'm not sure how this patch could ever have helped, since > it's just setting a variable to the value it _should_ have already had. > > Or do you just mean that the issue would have gone away with Jonathan's > patch to make the prefetching less aggressive? Yes, with Jonathan's patch we stop downloading blobs during Bloom filter computations. The patch this is "replacing" disabled that download in a different way, depending only on if detect_renames is false and the diff output doesn't need file contents. (Jonathan's is better.) -Stolee