From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.34.0-rc2
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 12:33:03 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqy25ujuv4.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YY17rBFIdDl+H47I@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 11 Nov 2021 15:23:08 -0500")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2021 at 09:32:29AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> ... So in this particular example, it would not matter if the
>> new unsorted traversal is subtly broken (I think the extent of the
>> damage is similar to making the SLOP problem deliberately worse),
>> but I am not sure if there are other failure modes that would yield
>> outright incorrect result.
>
> Yes, I think that framing is right: it is making SLOP much worse. We
> could similarly have had bogus timestamps in those commits which would
> cause the same outcome. So in that sense it is nothing new. On the other
> hand, I wonder how often it will cause extra traversal work (keeping in
> mind that this commit traversal is just the first stage; after we find
> the commits, then we talk all of their trees, which is the more
> expensive part).
>
> For the case of adding new commits directly on top of another branch, I
> think there would be no change. But any time you have to walk down to a
> common fork point (e.g., imagine I made a new branch forked from an old
> bit of history), we may fail to find that. I haven't quite constructed
> an example, but I have a feeling we could end up walking over
> arbitrarily long segments of history.
> ...
> I'd be curious to hear Patrick's thoughts on the whole thing.
Yes. I'm tempted to wait for him to chime in.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-11 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-10 0:59 [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.34.0-rc2 Junio C Hamano
2021-11-10 5:41 ` Jeff King
2021-11-10 6:00 ` Jeff King
2021-11-10 8:11 ` Carlo Arenas
2021-11-10 8:22 ` Jeff King
2021-11-10 9:15 ` Carlo Arenas
2021-11-10 9:35 ` Jeff King
2021-11-10 9:39 ` [PATCH] RelNotes: mention known crasher when ssh signing with OpenSSH 8.7 Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2021-11-10 21:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-10 22:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-11 9:16 ` Jeff King
[not found] ` <YY7/peK1EOHtATEI@camp.crustytoothpaste.net>
2021-11-13 0:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-10 21:49 ` [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.34.0-rc2 Junio C Hamano
2021-11-10 6:35 ` Johannes Altmanninger
2021-11-10 8:22 ` Jeff King
2021-11-10 21:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-11 12:07 ` Jeff King
2021-11-11 17:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-11-11 20:23 ` Jeff King
2021-11-11 20:33 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2021-11-15 15:06 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2021-11-15 15:27 ` Jeff King
2021-11-15 16:52 ` Jeff King
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=xmqqy25ujuv4.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=ps@pks.im \
/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).