On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 11:50:45PM +0200, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: > >There was a proposal at some point for a "notes" feature which would > >allow after-the-fact annotation of commits. I don't recall the exact > >details, but I think it stored its information as a git tree of blobs. > >You could choose whether or not to transfer the notes based on > >transferring a ref pointing to the notes tree. > > The idea is nice, but if we were to use it to store the origin link > information, the following happens: > - Origin link information is rare. > - Yet during a log/gitk/blame run the information might need to > be queried for at every commit. > - Since in most cases the origin information does not exist, this > will cause misses to fill the dentry cache for directory lookups, and > thus killing performance. > - In order to make this efficient, a different database lookup system is > needed that is fast for misses. I think you are misunderstanding what I meant by "git tree" here. It is literally a git tree object, so you don't ask the filesystem at all. You are looking up within the single object file. If it's a miss, you know after seeing that object. If not, then you dereference the blob object that contains the notes. -Peff -- 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
