On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 11:43:27AM +0100, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 3:53 PM Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > @@ -84,10 +84,12 @@ struct block_iter {
> >
> > /* key for last entry we read. */
> > struct strbuf last_key;
> > + struct strbuf key;
> > };
>
> it's slightly more efficient, but the new field has no essential
> meaning. If I encountered this code with the change you make here, I
> would probably refactor it in the opposite direction to increase code
> clarity.
>
> I suspect that the gains are too small to be measurable, but if you
> are after small efficiency gains, you can have
> reftable_record_decode() consume the key to avoid copying overhead in
> record.c.
Fair enough. I've done a better job for these kinds of refactorings for
the reftable library in my second patch series [1] by including some
benchmarks via Valgrind. This should result in less handwavy and
actually measurable/significant performance improvements.
Patrick
[1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/xmqqr0jgsn9g.fsf@gitster.g/T/#t
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
