Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > I'm undecided on this. I think reftables are still a while off, and even > once they are here, many people will still be using the older format. So > it makes sense to still apply fixes to the old code. Yeah. > What I wonder, though, is whether always refreshing will cause a > noticeable performance impact (and that's why I was so slow in > responding -- I had hoped to try to come up with some numbers, but I > just hadn't gotten around to it). > > My gut says it's _probably_ not an issue, but it would be nice to have > some data to back it up. I am tempted to let correctness (and ease-of-reasoning about the code) take precedence over potential and unknown performance issue, at least for now. A single liner is rather simple to revert (or in the worst case we could add "allow pack-refs to efficiently lose a ref to a race" configuration option) anyway.
