[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees
From: |
Tom Lord |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees |
Date: |
Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:33:49 -0800 (PST) |
> From: Chris Mason <address@hidden>
>> It's just that you're handwaving. From my perspective you aren't
>> saying "1 + 2 = 3" you're saying "x + y = z --- for example x might
>> be 1 and y might be 2 and z might be 3."
> A changeset represents a known set of changes to the source
> tree. ids aside, it should be possible to apply that known set
> of changes in roughly the same amount of time that patch would
> have needed.
> File ids make the problem more complex, but I don't understand
> how that can't be solved with a reverse mapping from id to file
> name. Most changeset operations should be on the order of the
> size of the changeset, not the size of the entire source. We're
> smart people, lets find a way ;-)
Do you mean having, in the tree, a persistent mapping (e.g., a file)
with the reverse mapping? While conceptually possible, that would
change the usage of arch in some significant ways (e.g., commands like
`tla delete' would be needed more often than they currently are in
both explicit and tagline trees).
>> The value to me of mason's experiment (now that the ChangeLog issues
>> convinces me it can't be saved) is still that it shows how much that
>> conjunction of simpler hacks can accomplish.
> I'll have to read up on the changelogs, in my mind we're applying a
> known set of changes, so we know what changed.
> But, only main goal for posting the code was to start discussion and
> show things can be better. If we get there from an entirely different
> direction, great.
I overstated one thing -- your hack _can_ still work for exact
patching.
-t
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Tom Lord, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Tom Lord, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Tom Lord, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Tom Lord, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Tom Lord, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees,
Tom Lord <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Tom Lord, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Miles Bader, 2003/12/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/19
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [PATCH] arch speedups on big trees, Chris Mason, 2003/12/19