git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fetch-pack: space out sent "haves" in negotiation
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 12:42:10 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqwovvujfx.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180521204340.260572-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (Jonathan Tan's message of "Mon, 21 May 2018 13:43:40 -0700")

Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes:

>  Makefile           |   1 +
>  fetch-negotiator.c | 309 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  fetch-negotiator.h |  40 ++++++
>  fetch-pack.c       | 174 ++++++-------------------
>  object.h           |   1 +
>  5 files changed, 392 insertions(+), 133 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 fetch-negotiator.c
>  create mode 100644 fetch-negotiator.h

Somehow this feels more like a WIP than RFC, primarily for two
reasons.  It was unclear what "edge" computation is trying to do; it
seems way under-explained, especially the part that takes min-max
while. merging two candidates.

It also was unclear if this should be organized as a "take it or
leave it" patch like this one, or eventually should be split into
multiple steps when it gets polished enough to be considered for
application, the early ones introducing a separate negotiator module
without changing the common ancestor discovery algorithm at all,
with later steps refining that negotiator and add more efficient
common ancestor discovery process.

> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index ad880d1fc5..8bbedfa521 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -859,6 +859,7 @@ LIB_OBJS += ewah/ewah_bitmap.o
>  LIB_OBJS += ewah/ewah_io.o
>  LIB_OBJS += ewah/ewah_rlw.o
>  LIB_OBJS += exec-cmd.o
> +LIB_OBJS += fetch-negotiator.o
>  LIB_OBJS += fetch-object.o
>  LIB_OBJS += fetch-pack.o
>  LIB_OBJS += fsck.o
> diff --git a/fetch-negotiator.c b/fetch-negotiator.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..58975e1c37
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/fetch-negotiator.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,309 @@
> +#include "cache.h"
> +#include "commit.h"
> +#include "fetch-negotiator.h"
> +
> +#define NO_THE_INDEX_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS

A totally unrelated tangent, but will we also benefit from
NO_THE_REPO_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS eventually?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-05-23  3:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-21 20:43 [RFC PATCH] fetch-pack: space out sent "haves" in negotiation Jonathan Tan
2018-05-21 22:57 ` Stefan Beller
2018-05-22 18:44   ` Jonathan Tan
2018-05-22 19:01     ` Stefan Beller
2018-05-23  1:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2018-05-23  3:42 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2018-05-29 16:58   ` Jonathan Tan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqwovvujfx.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).