Re: [PATCH v7 17/31] merge-recursive: add a new hashmap for storing directory renames

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

 



>> Having a stringlist of potentially new dirs sounds like the algorithm is
>> at least n^2, but how do I know? I'll read on.
>
> Yes, I suppose it's technically n^2, but n is expected to be O(1).
> While one can trivially construct a case making n arbitrarily large,
> statistically for real world repositories, I expected the mode of n to
> be 1 and the mean to be less than 2.  My original idea was to use a
> hash for possible_new_dirs, but since hashes are so painful in C and n
> should be very small anyway, I didn't bother.  If anyone can find an
> example of a real world open source repository (linux, webkit, git,
> etc.) with a merge where n is greater than about 10, I'll be
> surprised.
>
> Does that address your concern, or does it sound like I'm kicking the
> can down the road?  If it's the latter, we can switch it out.

I think that is fine for now; the real world usage matters more
than the big O notation. But maybe you want to hint at the possibility of
speedup (in the commit message or in code?), once someone produces
a slow case and digs up the code.



[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]

  Powered by Linux