On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 10:05:11AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > shejialuo <shejialuo@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 04:55:31PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> [Cooking] > >> * ps/refname-avail-check-optim (2025-03-06) 16 commits > >> - refs: reuse iterators when determining refname availability > >> - refs/iterator: implement seeking for files iterators > >> - refs/iterator: implement seeking for packed-ref iterators > >> - refs/iterator: implement seeking for ref-cache iterators > >> - refs/iterator: implement seeking for reftable iterators > >> - refs/iterator: implement seeking for merged iterators > >> - refs/iterator: provide infrastructure to re-seek iterators > >> - refs/iterator: separate lifecycle from iteration > >> - refs: stop re-verifying common prefixes for availability > >> - refs/files: batch refname availability checks for initial transactions > >> - refs/files: batch refname availability checks for normal transactions > >> - refs/reftable: batch refname availability checks > >> - refs: introduce function to batch refname availability checks > >> - builtin/update-ref: skip ambiguity checks when parsing object IDs > >> - object-name: allow skipping ambiguity checks in `get_oid()` family > >> - object-name: introduce `repo_get_oid_with_flags()` > >> (this branch is used by kn/non-transactional-batch-updates.) > >> > >> The code paths to check whether a refname X is available (by seeing > >> if another ref X/Y exists, etc.) have been optimized. > >> > >> Needs review. > >> source: <20250306-pks-update-ref-optimization-v5-0-dcb2ee037e97@xxxxxx> > > > > I have reviewed some patches for the earlier version. This week, if I > > have bandwidth, I would review the whole patches again for this version. > > Thanks. Any topic outside 'next' would not move until the final > release so it is not urgent (read: if you find a new regression > introduced to 'master' during this cycle and can work on fixing it, > that should take precedence), but if you do have bandwidth to do so > it would be great. Yes, exactly. We need to prioritize the things related to release. Fortunately, I have some time tonight to review :)
