Andreas Ericsson <ae@xxxxxx> wrote: > > "Copy-rewrite", naturally. Being able to lift much of the data-munging code > is a great benefit. It's basically just the revision traversal (which is > heavy on state-dependant code) that I haven't quite figured out how to do > yet, but I believe Shawn's idea of using revision pools is most likely the > way to go. Each application has to make sure a pool isn't modified by more > than one thread, but each application can have as many pools as it likes. I also like Pierre's idea of using annotation data in different annotation pools, and storing the rewritten parents in such a pool. Then an application can more easily reuse a revision pool, by just tossing the rewritten parent pool, or any other annotations it wants to recompute. It may still be important to have revision pools and make them not thread-safe, so we can void fine-grained locking costs in the library during the tight revision traversal loops. -- Shawn. -- 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
