Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] update-index: use the bulk-checkin infrastructure

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

 



On Sun, Mar 20 2022, Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget wrote:

> From: Neeraj Singh <neerajsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The update-index functionality is used internally by 'git stash push' to
> setup the internal stashed commit.
>
> This change enables bulk-checkin for update-index infrastructure to
> speed up adding new objects to the object database by leveraging the
> batch fsync functionality.
>
> There is some risk with this change, since under batch fsync, the object
> files will be in a tmp-objdir until update-index is complete.  This
> usage is unlikely, since any tool invoking update-index and expecting to
> see objects would have to synchronize with the update-index process
> after passing it a file path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neeraj Singh <neerajsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  builtin/update-index.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/update-index.c b/builtin/update-index.c
> index 75d646377cc..38e9d7e88cb 100644
> --- a/builtin/update-index.c
> +++ b/builtin/update-index.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>   */
>  #define USE_THE_INDEX_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS
>  #include "cache.h"
> +#include "bulk-checkin.h"
>  #include "config.h"
>  #include "lockfile.h"
>  #include "quote.h"
> @@ -1110,6 +1111,9 @@ int cmd_update_index(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  
>  	the_index.updated_skipworktree = 1;
>  
> +	/* we might be adding many objects to the object database */
> +	plug_bulk_checkin();
> +

Shouldn't this be after parse_options_start()?



[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