On Tue, Aug 03 2021, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]] > On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 02:49:29PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 02 2021, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > [snip] >> > Introduce a new "--unsorted-input" flag to git-rev-list(1) which will >> > cause it to not sort the commits and adjust the connectivity check to >> > always pass the flag. This results in the following speedups, executed >> > in a clone of gitlab-org/gitlab [1]: >> > >> > Benchmark #1: git rev-list --objects --quiet --not --all --not $(cat newrev) >> > Time (mean ± σ): 7.639 s ± 0.065 s [User: 7.304 s, System: 0.335 s] >> > Range (min … max): 7.543 s … 7.742 s 10 runs >> > >> > Benchmark #2: git rev-list --unsorted-input --objects --quiet --not --all --not $newrev >> > Time (mean ± σ): 4.995 s ± 0.044 s [User: 4.657 s, System: 0.337 s] >> > Range (min … max): 4.909 s … 5.048 s 10 runs >> > >> > Summary >> > 'git rev-list --unsorted-input --objects --quiet --not --all --not $(cat newrev)' ran >> > 1.53 ± 0.02 times faster than 'git rev-list --objects --quiet --not --all --not $newrev' >> >> Just bikeshedding for a potential re-roll, perhaps --unordered-input, so >> that it matches/rhymes with the existing "git cat-file --unordered", >> which serves the same conceptual purpose (except this one's input, that >> one's output). > > Yeah, I wasn't quite sure how to name it myself either. Internally, we > typically use "unsorted" instead of "unordered", and there's also the > preexisting "--no-walk=(sorted|unsorted)" flag for git-rev-list(1). With > the latter in mind, I think that "unsorted" fits a bit better given that > we already use it in the same command, but I don't particularly mind. > > For now, I'll keep "--unsorted-input", but please feel free to give me > another shout if you disagree with my reasoning. Sounds good. I didn't mean it as a strong suggestion, unsorted does indeed sounds better in this context, just a gentle poke to check if you knew about that similar option... Thanks.
