Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2016-08-11

Re: [PATCH] gc: default aggressive depth to 50

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 18:52:30

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:13:09PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
quoted
Here are the numbers for linux.git:

   depth |  size |  %    | rev-list |  %     | log -Sfoo |   %
  -------+-------+-------+----------+--------+-----------+-------
    250  | 967MB |  n/a  | 48.159s  |   n/a  | 378.088   |   n/a
    100  | 971MB | +0.4% | 41.471s  | -13.9% | 342.060   |  -9.5%
     50  | 979MB | +1.2% | 37.778s  | -21.6% | 311.040s  | -17.7%
     10  | 1.1GB | +6.6% | 32.518s  | -32.5% | 279.890s  | -25.9%
[...]

You can see that that the CPU savings for regular operations improves as we
decrease the depth. The savings are less for "rev-list" on a smaller repository
than they are for blob-accessing operations, or even rev-list on a larger
repository. This may mean that a larger delta cache would help (though setting
core.deltaBaseCacheLimit by itself doesn't).
The problem with deltaBaseCacheLimit is that it only changes the memory
parameter, but there are a fixed number of slots in the data structure.
Bumping it like this:
diff --git a/sha1_file.c b/sha1_file.c
index 02940f1..ca79703 100644
--- a/sha1_file.c
+++ b/sha1_file.c
@@ -2073,7 +2073,7 @@ static void *unpack_compressed_entry(struct packed_git *p,
 	return buffer;
 }
 
-#define MAX_DELTA_CACHE (256)
+#define MAX_DELTA_CACHE (1024)
 
 static size_t delta_base_cached;
along with the cache size does help (this was discussed a year or two
ago, but nobody ever followed up with numbers or patches).
Yeah, and I also think Linus's "--depth=250 is just a sample; it
will not perform well" already cited the number of delta-cache
entries being the limiting factor.
I don't think bumping MAX_DELTA_CACHE naively is a good idea, though. I
seem to recall that it has scaling problems as it grows, so we may want
a better data structure (but I haven't looked at it recently enough to
say anything intelligent).
Me neither.  In any case, I do think reducing the aggressive depth
down to 50 is a very sensible move.  I also suspect that window size
may want to be a bit increased (or even made dynamic; the first time
we need the window size determined is after to_pack.objects[] array
is fully populated, so we could use the number of commits as one of
the hint, for example), but that can be treated as a separate topic.

Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help