Re: [PATCH 11/20] refs: record the ref_store in ref_cache, not ref_dir

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 05:33:16PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:

Instead of keeping a pointer to the ref_store in every ref_dir entry,
store it once in `struct ref_cache`, and change `struct ref_dir` to
include a pointer to its containing `ref_cache` instead. This makes it
easier to add to the information that is stored in `struct ref_cache`
without inflating the size of the individual entries.

This last sentence confused me. It's a pointer either way, no?

Do you just mean that we are free to add whatever we like to the
"ref_cache" without polluting the "ref_store" that is a more public data
structure?

-Peff