Andy Parkins wrote:
On Tuesday 2006 December 12 11:32, Bahadir Balban wrote:
If I don't know which files I may be touching in the future for
implementing some feature, then I am obliged to add all the files even
if they are irrelevant. I said "performance reasons" assuming all the
file hashes need checked for every commit -a to see if they're
changed, but I just tried on a PIII and it seems not so slow.
Here's a handy rule of thumb I've learned in my use of git:
"git is fast. Really fast."
Almost alarmingly so. When I started using git (back in May/June last
year, when git was 2 - 3 months old), I was worried at first because it
didn't seem to actually *do* anything, but just returned me to the
prompt immediately.
As to your direct concern: git doesn't hash every file at every commit. There
is no need. git has an "index" that is used to prepare a commit; at the time
you do the actual commit, git already knows which files are being checked in.
In short - don't worry about making life easy for git - it's a workhorse and
does a grand job.
Yup. Now I've gone the other way around and think other scm's are broken
when they chew disk for 10 seconds whenever I try to do anything with
them. I usually end up importing the other repo into git and do my work
there.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
-
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