Since 'git pack-objects' supports a --path-walk option, allow passing it
through in 'git repack'. This presents interesting testing opportunities for
comparing the different repacking strategies against each other.
Add the --path-walk option to the performance tests in p5313.
For the microsoft/fluentui repo [1] checked out at a specific commit [2],
the results are very interesting:
Test this tree
------------------------------------------------------------------
5313.2: thin pack 0.40(0.47+0.04)
5313.3: thin pack size 1.2M
5313.4: thin pack with --full-name-hash 0.09(0.10+0.04)
5313.5: thin pack size with --full-name-hash 22.8K
5313.6: thin pack with --path-walk 0.08(0.06+0.02)
5313.7: thin pack size with --path-walk 20.8K
5313.8: big pack 2.16(8.43+0.23)
5313.9: big pack size 17.7M
5313.10: big pack with --full-name-hash 1.42(3.06+0.21)
5313.11: big pack size with --full-name-hash 18.0M
5313.12: big pack with --path-walk 2.21(8.39+0.24)
5313.13: big pack size with --path-walk 17.8M
5313.14: repack 98.05(662.37+2.64)
5313.15: repack size 449.1K
5313.16: repack with --full-name-hash 33.95(129.44+2.63)
5313.17: repack size with --full-name-hash 182.9K
5313.18: repack with --path-walk 106.21(121.58+0.82)
5313.19: repack size with --path-walk 159.6K
[1] https://github.com/microsoft/fluentui
[2] e70848ebac1cd720875bccaa3026f4a9ed700e08
This repo suffers from having a lot of paths that collide in the name
hash, so examining them in groups by path leads to better deltas. Also,
in this case, the single-threaded implementation is competitive with the
full repack. This is saving time diffing files that have significant
differences from each other.
A similar, but private, repo has even more extremes in the thin packs:
Test this tree
--------------------------------------------------------------
5313.2: thin pack 2.39(2.91+0.10)
5313.3: thin pack size 4.5M
5313.4: thin pack with --full-name-hash 0.29(0.47+0.12)
5313.5: thin pack size with --full-name-hash 15.5K
5313.6: thin pack with --path-walk 0.35(0.31+0.04)
5313.7: thin pack size with --path-walk 14.2K
Notice, however, that while the --full-name-hash version is working
quite well in these cases for the thin pack, it does poorly for some
other standard cases, such as this test on the Linux kernel repository:
Test this tree
--------------------------------------------------------------
5313.2: thin pack 0.01(0.00+0.00)
5313.3: thin pack size 310
5313.4: thin pack with --full-name-hash 0.00(0.00+0.00)
5313.5: thin pack size with --full-name-hash 1.4K
5313.6: thin pack with --path-walk 0.00(0.00+0.00)
5313.7: thin pack size with --path-walk 310
Here, the --full-name-hash option does much worse than the default name
hash, but the path-walk option does exactly as well.
Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
All the documentation .txt files have been renamed to .adoc to help
content aware editors.
* bc/doc-adoc-not-txt:
Remove obsolete ".txt" extensions for AsciiDoc files
doc: use .adoc extension for AsciiDoc files
gitattributes: mark AsciiDoc files as LF-only
editorconfig: add .adoc extension
doc: update gitignore for .adoc extension
We presently use the ".txt" extension for our AsciiDoc files. While not
wrong, most editors do not associate this extension with AsciiDoc,
meaning that contributors don't get automatic editor functionality that
could be useful, such as syntax highlighting and prose linting.
It is much more common to use the ".adoc" extension for AsciiDoc files,
since this helps editors automatically detect files and also allows
various forges to provide rich (HTML-like) rendering. Let's do that
here, renaming all of the files and updating the includes where
relevant. Adjust the various build scripts and makefiles to use the new
extension as well.
Note that this should not result in any user-visible changes to the
documentation.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
