On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 9:21 PM Duy Nguyen wrote:
> > I used p0002-read-cache.sh to generate some performance data on the
> > cumulative impact:
> >
> > 100,000 entries
> >
> > TestHEAD~3 HEAD~2
> > --
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 5:25 PM Ben Peart wrote:
>
> This patch helps address the CPU cost of loading the index by loading
> the cache extensions on a worker thread in parallel with loading the cache
> entries.
>
> This is possible because the current extensions don't access the cache
> entries in
Ben Peart writes:
> There isn't any change in behavior with unknown extensions and this
> patch. If an unknown extension exists it will just get ignored and
> reported as an "unknown extension" or "die" if it is marked as
> "required."
OK.
On 8/29/2018 1:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ben Peart writes:
This is possible because the current extensions don't access the cache
entries in the index_state structure so are OK that they don't all exist
yet.
The CACHE_EXT_TREE, CACHE_EXT_RESOLVE_UNDO, and CACHE_EXT_UNTRACKED
extensions
Ben Peart writes:
> This is possible because the current extensions don't access the cache
> entries in the index_state structure so are OK that they don't all exist
> yet.
>
> The CACHE_EXT_TREE, CACHE_EXT_RESOLVE_UNDO, and CACHE_EXT_UNTRACKED
> extensions don't even get a pointer to the index s
This patch helps address the CPU cost of loading the index by loading
the cache extensions on a worker thread in parallel with loading the cache
entries.
This is possible because the current extensions don't access the cache
entries in the index_state structure so are OK that they don't all exist
6 matches
Mail list logo
