David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > ... I still believe that the cache-tree behavior would be > suboptimal, ... I do not think anybody doubts that "suboptimal"-ness in this thread. As you saw the "incremental" thing from Peff and my responses to it, there may be more things we could be doing. It just has not been at a ultra high priority, and if we can choose only one change from possibilities, losing the entire cache-tree upon switching branches, like in my two-way read-tree example, would be the thing that would give us the most benefit if we somehow change it. That however is unfortunately not a low-hanging fruit. The two-way merge machinery we use for switching branches wants to populate the index one entry at a time, without having any point where you can say "OK the result in this subdirectory will exactly match this subtree" which would allow us to say "prime the cache tree for that subdirectory with this tree object". -- 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