From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: git performance after directory copy Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:57:26 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4C974A00.8030905@viscovery.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Gaer\, A." , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Sixt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Sep 20 16:02:16 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oxgwh-0001ia-03 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 16:02:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755439Ab0ITOCF (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:02:05 -0400 Received: from imag.imag.fr ([129.88.30.1]:52372 "EHLO imag.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754811Ab0ITOCE (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:02:04 -0400 Received: from mail-veri.imag.fr (mail-veri.imag.fr [129.88.43.52]) by imag.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o8KDvRLU022449 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:57:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bauges.imag.fr ([129.88.43.5]) by mail-veri.imag.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oxgs3-0001vS-7Y; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:57:27 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4C974A00.8030905@viscovery.net> (Johannes Sixt's message of "Mon\, 20 Sep 2010 13\:48\:16 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (imag.imag.fr [129.88.30.1]); Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:57:27 +0200 (CEST) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Sixt writes: > Am 9/20/2010 11:56, schrieb Matthieu Moy: >> But I'm surprised that the next "git status" are still slow. Other >> people may get a better explanation, but this very much looks like a >> bug. > > Most likely, Andreas works with 1.7.1. From the release notes of 1.7.1.1: > > * "git status" stopped refreshing the index by mistake in 1.7.1. Nice catch, and this explains why I couldn't reproduce with latest Git. More precisely, it was fixed here: b2f6fd9 t7508: add a test for "git status" in a read-only repository 4bb6644 git status: refresh the index if possible 4c926b3 t7508: add test for "git status" refreshing the index -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/