Re: [RFH] git cherry-pick takes forever

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

 



 Hello,

Junio C Hamano wrote:
>Michal Vitecek <fuf@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>>  I have two git repositories: one is the origin of the other. However no
>>  merging is being done as the projects in the repositories quite differ
>>  but still use the same core. So to propagate changes I cherry-pick
>>  those which are useful from one repository to another.
>>
>>  however 'git cherry-pick' has lately started to last almost forever:
>
>Can you define "lately"?  Is it a function of your git version, or is it a
>function of the age of your repositories?

 It's a function a cherry-picking some commits - afterwards
 cherry-picking crawls. One of the commits removes a number of files
 (614) and also renames some (303).

>>  $ time git cherry-pick b42b77e66a83f1298d9900a9bb1078b9b42e8618
>>  Finished one cherry-pick.
>>  Created commit 7caef83: - removed some superfluous newlines
>>  2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>  git cherry-pick b42b77e66a83f1298d9900a9bb1078b9b42e8618  282.97s user 34.69s system 100% cpu 5:17.63 total
>>
>>  Both repositories have approximately 16k commits and their forking
>>  point (merge base) is 250 to 490 commits far away.
>
>When talking about cherry-pick, the size of the history (unless the
>repository has too many objects and badly packed) does not matter; the
>operation is purely about your current state, the cherry-picked commit
>itself, and the parent commit of the cherry-picked one.

 I too thought so but after cherry-picking starting taking so long I
 began to doubt my thoughts :)

>Taking 5 minutes to cherry-pick a change to only two paths, one line
>deletion each, is plain ridiculous, but if the tree state of cherry-picked
>commit and the tree state of the target is vastly different (e.g. almost
>no common pathnames), the behaviour is certainly understandable.  Ancient
>git used straight three-way merge for cherry-pick, but recent ones use
>more expensive "recursive-merge", which tries to detect renames.  If the
>states of trees are very dissimilar, you can end up wasting a lot of time.
>
>    $ H=$(git rev-parse 7caef83^) ;# the commit before cherry-pick
>    $ C=b42b77e6 ;# the cherry-picked one
>
>cherry-pick operation roughly runs these two diffs:
>
>    $ time git diff --shortstat -M $H $C

 $ time git diff --shortstat -M $H $C
 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 git diff --shortstat -M $H $C  0.00s user 0.00s system 72% cpu 0.006 total

>    $ time git diff --shortstat -M $H $C^1

 $ time git diff --shortstat -M $H $C\^1
 git diff --shortstat -M $H $C\^1  0.00s user 0.00s system 0% cpu 0.003 total

>and uses the result to perform its work.  Can you clock these?
>
>If you rarely have renames, it may be much more efficient to run "git
>format-patch -1 --stdout $C | git am -3" instead of cherry-pick.

 Turning off renames detection in diff (via 'git config --add diff.renames
 false') helped and 'git cherry-pick' is instant now.

 Maybe my repositories are "strange" in some way. I would be more than
 happy to provide more information if needed.

        Thank you,
-- 
		Michal Vitecek		(fuf@xxxxxxxx)
--
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