Re: rename detection limit checking, cherry picking, and git am -3

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
In this case `git am -3` creates a tree object containing only
the files modified by the patch and then feeds that tree into
git-merge-recursive.  Now if you go study git-revert's code you'll
see it actually just calls git-merge-recursive on three trees,
but these are three complete trees.

So what's probably happening here is there's less candidates on one
side in the `am -3` case, so we spend a lot less time generating
the rename matrix, searching for a match, and we get better changes
of finding a match.

Thanks for the explanation. For my case, there are < 500 files (including renamed files) in common between the two branches, giving ~2000*4000 files that have no correspondence for which git can try to find renames. Clearly, reducing the one side from 4000 files to 1 file has an enormous payoff.

Mark
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux