On Thu, 14 Aug 2008, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
quoted text
> 
> > so most of it is in inflate,
> 
> Which, again, would be eliminated entirely by pack v4.

I seriously doubt that.

Nico, it's really easy to say "I wave my magic wand and nothing remains".

It's hard to actually _do_.

quoted text
> One optimization with pack v4 was to have delta chunks aligned on tree 
> records, and because tree objects are no longer compressed, parsing a 
> tree object could be done by simply walking the delta chain directly.  

Even if you do that, please take a look at the performance characteristics 
of modern CPU's.

Here's a hint: the cost of a cache miss is generally about a hundred times 
the cost of just about anything else. 

So to make a convincing argument, you'd have to show that the actual 
memory access patterns are also much better.

No, zlib isn't perfect, and nope, inflate_fast() is no "memcpy()". And 
yes, I'm sure a pure memcpy would be much faster. But I seriously suspect 
that a lot of the cost is literally in bringing in the source data to the 
CPU. Because we just mmap() the whole pack-file, the first access to the 
data is going to see the cost of the cache misses.

			Linus
--
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