From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat•com>
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] diff: add a config option to control orderfile
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 11:06:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq38p3z5kg.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130917172829.GA21121@redhat.com> (Michael S. Tsirkin's message of "Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:28:30 +0300")
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat•com> writes:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:24:19AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat•com> writes:
>>
>> > So might it not be useful to tweak patch id to
>> > sort the diff, making it a bit more stable?
>>
>> That is one thing that needs to be done, I think. But it would be
>> unfortunate if we have to do that unconditionally, though, as we may
>> be "buffering" many hundred kilobytes of patch text in core. If we
>> can do so without regressing the streaming performance for the most
>> common case of not using the orderfile on the generating side (hence
>> not having to sort on the receiving end), it would be ideal. I am
>> not sure offhand how much code damage we are talking about, though.
>
> So make it conditional on the presence of the orderefile option?
That would mean that those who set orderfile from configuration in
the future will have to always suffer, I would think. Is that
acceptable? I dunno.
Also, if the sender used a non-standard order, the recipient does
not know what order the patch was generated, and the recipient does
not use a custom orderfile, what should happen? I thought your idea
was to normalize by using some canonical order that is not affected
by the orderfile to make sure patch-id stays stable, so I would
imagine that such a recipient who does not have orderfile specified
still needs to sort before hashing, no?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-17 18:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-31 19:44 [PATCH] diff: add a config option to control orderfile Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-03 17:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-03 21:08 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-15 7:49 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-15 8:08 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 16:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-17 16:42 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 17:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-17 17:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 18:06 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2013-09-17 19:25 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 20:14 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 20:16 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 20:18 ` Jeff King
2013-09-17 20:38 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 20:41 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 20:56 ` Jeff King
2013-09-17 21:03 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-17 21:06 ` Jeff King
2013-09-17 21:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-09-19 21:32 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-23 21:09 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-23 21:37 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-09-24 5:45 ` Jeff King
2013-09-24 5:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-24 19:36 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-09-24 20:15 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-24 21:31 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-09-24 21:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-24 22:08 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-09-17 20:31 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-09-21 21:08 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqq38p3z5kg.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox