Re: [PATCH 3/3] commit-graph: respect 'core.useBloomFilters'
flat view
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2020-06-30 19:33:42
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 03:27:18PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:
So, I'm certainly open to changing it, although I'm not sure that I'm as worried about exposing the implementation detail as I am about squatting on Bloom filters within Git in general. I don't think that this configuration will end up getting used by folks other than server administrators and for debugging purposes, so those populations are already likely to be aware of changed-path Bloom filters beforehand.
Yeah, the squatting thing is definitely my bigger concern (having been through the "bitmaps" version of the same thing).
quoted
It might even be worth considering whether "changed paths" needs more context (or would if we add new features in the future). On a "git commit-graph write" command-line it is perfectly clear, but would core.commitGraphChangedPaths be worth it? It's definitely more specific, but it's also way more ugly. ;)Here's a third option what about 'graph.readChangedPaths'. I think that Stolee and I discussed a new top-level 'graph' section, since we now have a few commit-graph-related configuration variables in 'core'.
Yes, I like that even better. Probably "graph" is sufficiently specific within Git's context, though I guess it _could_ bring to mind "git log --graph". So many overloaded terms. :)
That's a little shorter, and it adds the verb 'read', which is more descriptive than 'use' (I touch on this in the third patch, where I say that this configuration variable _doesn't_ affect the '--changed-path' option when writing).
Yeah, saying "read" specifically is much nicer.
quoted
quoted
+ prepare_repo_settings(the_repository); + graph = read_commit_graph_one(the_repository, odb);I wondered why we would need this prepare_repo_settings() now, when it should have been needed already to cover core.commitGraph already. I strongly suspect the answer is: "test-tool read-graph" never properly respected core.commitGraph in the first place.Yep. Could probably be broken out into a separate patch (or mentioned as an aside in this one), but you're right: this helper did not respect any configuration that 'prepare_repo_settings' picks up.
I'd probably just note it in the commit message, but I'd be fine with that or with a separate patch. -Peff