Re: [PATCH 7/8] config: add core.untrackedCache

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think we may actually be thinking of the same thing. Naively, I would
> expect:
>
> ..
>   - if there is cache data in the index but that config flag is not set,
>     presumably we would not update it (we could even explicitly drop it,
>     but my understanding is that is not necessary for correctness, but
>     only as a possible optimization).

No, if somebody adds or removes something from the index, we either
update or drop it, or it's stale. There's the invalidate_untracked()
or something in dir.c that we can hook in, check config var and do
that. And because config is cached recently, it should be a cheap
operation.

Apart from that the idea is fine.

> You could have a config option for "if there is a cache there, pretend
> it isn't and ignore it", but I don't see much point.
-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]