Thanks Junio. I'd be happy to have my change go in first. I'm hoping that we'll be able to get a lot of mileage with batch mode in Git For Windows early on. Thanks, Neeraj On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 11:52 PM Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 3:01 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Neeraj Singh <nksingh85@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > Elijah, > > > > > > Here's a branch of your changes based on the amalgamated tmp-objdir code: > > > https://github.com/neerajsi-msft/git/commits/neerajsi/remerge-diff > > > > > > This commit adapts your code to use the amalgamated API: > > > https://github.com/neerajsi-msft/git/commit/725328fe1d8be8326d2ddef78e164ca21450b100 > > > > It seems that the discussion petered out at this point. > > > > Right now I have a version of ns/remerge-diff before this adjustment > > in 'seen', and Neeraj's latest version is kept out of 'seen' as they > > do not play well together without an adjustment like that. > > > > What's the good way forward? I do not deeply care which one goes > > first, but I have a feeling that the need by remerge-diff that wants > > to discard temporary objects would involve more work to make it safe > > than the need by batched fsync where newly created objects will not > > be discarded but merely moved to the primary store before the end of > > the operation, so from that point of view, it seems simpler and > > safer to queue ns/batched-fsync topic first (especially given that > > it is a no-op until the end-user opts into the experiment), and have > > a remerge-diff that uses the infrastructure from Neeraj's topic. > > > > What's your take on the rebase Neeraj made, Elijah (at the URL > > above)? > > I meant to dig further, but nearly all my git time in the last week > and a half was attempting to keep up with other patch reviews. My git > time is fast disappearing in the near term, and it's not clear how > much, if any, time I'll have to work on patches (or even continued > reviewing) before, say, mid-November. I most likely won't be able to > do any discussion-prep work in advance of the Git Contributor's > Summit, and might not even be able to attend anymore. > > I had looked over Neeraj's patches and they looked reasonable. I > thought there might be some tweaks that I could try out, but at this > point, just take what he has and keep my topic as expecting an update. > I'll circle back eventually. > > Sorry for the delay.
