Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix the rename detection limit checking

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:

but the patch I sent out was the "obvious" first one that at least avoided 
the overflow for the triggerable case that Dmitry had, and as per above 
likely in all reasonable cases...

Final note (I promise): the patch I sent out took "git runstatus" times on 
the workload I replicated from Dmitry down from "so long you'd ^C it" to 
about two seconds..

So I wanted to point out that this was not just the correctness issue of 
the overflow, but that the rename limiting really does need to be done for 
purely practical time reasons - doing the math in 64 bits would have 
avoided the overflow, but wouldn't have avoided the real reason for not 
wanting to do these kinds of things in the first place!

		Linus