On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 10:26:24AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > As discussed there, I do think this only solves half the problem, as the > > smudge filter has the same issue in reverse. That's more complicated to > > fix, and AFAIK nobody is working on it. But I don't think there's any > > reason not to pick up this part in the meantime. > > Yeah, I agree that the reverse direction shares the same issue. > > I am not sure 0 is a good initial value in this direction, either; > I'd rather clip to min(len, core.bigfilethreshold) or something like > that, to avoid regressing the more normal use cases. That was my initial thought, too, but Joey's benchmarks show that it doesn't seem to make a big difference either way. In his numbers it did get measurable for a 1GB file, but we'd still not use "hint == len" in that case (we'd probably do one or two doublings to get there). I also think running a real (non-condensing) filter on a 1GB file is already a pretty unlikely corner case. > But let's queue this and see what happens. Sounds good to me. -Peff
