On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 12:58:50PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:I haven't done any real measurements but my feeling is that the recursive strategy is at least not very much slower than the resolve strategy. In the single-common-ancestor case I can think of the following things which may make a difference speed wise: * The recursive strategy is written in Python * The code for finding common ancestors is also written in Python and is probably a bit slower than git-merge-base. * git-diff-tree -M --diff-filter=R <common ancestor> <branch> is executed twice, once for each branch. On the positive side the code which corresponds to git-merge-one-file in the git-resolve case is also written in python, we can therefore avoid some forks and execs. I don't think this is a very good idea for two reasons. The first one is that there are some merge scenarios involving renames which should be conflicts but are cleanly merged by git-resolve. The second reason is that with the fall back list the recursive strategy will only be used in the strange corner cases and will thus not get nearly the same amount of testing it would get if it was the first choice (or directly after the really-trivial merge). - Fredrik - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Mariusz Kozlowski | [PATCH 01] kmalloc + memset conversion co kzalloc |
| Rafael J. Wysocki | [Bug #10629] 2.6.26-rc1-$sha1: RIP __d_lookup+0x8c/0x160 |
| Vladislav Bolkhovitin | Re: Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| Jeff Garzik | Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
git: | |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Andrew Morton | Re: [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
