On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 8:07 AM, Ken Brownfield <krb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > cache_name_compare (and the presumed follow-ons of memcpy/sha/malloc/etc) is the major consumer. Other people have given you alternative approaches. I'm just wondering if we can improve something here. cache_name_compare() is essentially memcmp() on two full paths. A tree-based index might help. How long are your file names on average? Are your trees deep? -- Duy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html