On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 7:01 AM Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > The recently-implemented expand_to_path() method can supply position > queries a faster response if they are specifically asking for a path > within the sparse cone. Since this is the most-common scenario, this > provides a significant speedup. > > Update t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh to fully ensure that 'git > status' does not expand a sparse index to a full one, even when there > exist untracked files. > > The performance test script p2000-sparse-operations.sh demonstrates > that this is the final hole to fill to allow 'git status' to speed up > when using a sparse index: > > Test HEAD~1 HEAD > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > 2000.4: git status (sparse-index-v3) 1.50(1.43+0.10) 0.04(0.04+0.03) -97.3% > 2000.5: git status (sparse-index-v4) 1.50(1.43+0.10) 0.04(0.03+0.04) -97.3% Um, I'm confused. In the previous patch you claimed the following speedups: 2000.4: git status (sparse-index-v3) 2.43(2.33+0.14) 0.04(0.05+0.04) -98.4% 2000.5: git status (sparse-index-v4) 2.44(2.35+0.13) 0.05(0.04+0.07) -98.0% I don't understand why the "Before" for this patch claims 1.50 as the initial speed, if the "After" for the last patch was 0.04. Should the previous commit message have instead claimed: 2000.4: git status (sparse-index-v3) 2.43(2.33+0.14) 1.50(1.43+0.10) -38.3% 2000.5: git status (sparse-index-v4) 2.44(2.35+0.13) 1.50(1.43+0.10) -38.5% ? > > Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh b/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh > index 380a085f8ec4..b937d7096afd 100755 > --- a/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh > +++ b/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh > @@ -456,8 +456,9 @@ test_expect_success 'sparse-index is not expanded' ' > init_repos && > > rm -f trace2.txt && > + echo >>sparse-index/untracked.txt && > GIT_TRACE2_EVENT="$(pwd)/trace2.txt" GIT_TRACE2_EVENT_NESTING=10 \ > - git -C sparse-index status -uno && > + git -C sparse-index status && > test_region ! index ensure_full_index trace2.txt > ' > > -- > gitgitgadget Oh! So, the previous patch was testing without enumerating untracked files (because it did those slowly), whereas this one enumerates untracked files and is still able to achieve the same performance? This wasn't very clear from the commit message. Maybe I'm just bad at reading, but perhaps the commit message could be tweaked slightly to make this more clear?
