On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 07:01:54PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote:

On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 7:03 AM Patrick Steinhardt [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Benchmarks in a repository with about 2,1 million refs and an up-to-date
commit-graph show a 20% speedup when mirror-fetching:

    Benchmark 1: git fetch --atomic +refs/*:refs/* (v2.35.0)
      Time (mean ± σ):     75.264 s ±  1.115 s    [User: 68.199 s, System: 10.094 s]
      Range (min … max):   74.145 s … 76.862 s    5 runs

    Benchmark 2: git fetch --atomic +refs/*:refs/* (HEAD)
      Time (mean ± σ):     62.350 s ±  0.854 s    [User: 55.412 s, System: 9.976 s]
      Range (min … max):   61.224 s … 63.216 s    5 runs

    Summary
      'git fetch --atomic +refs/*:refs/* (HEAD)' ran
        1.21 ± 0.02 times faster than 'git fetch --atomic +refs/*:refs/* (v2.35.0)'

The commit message and code make sense to me, but I wonder if there is
a reason why --atomic is used when fetching.

The repository that I was mirror-fetching into needs to update a big
bunch of references, and doing that via `--atomic` is more efficient
than doing it without, and this shows in the benchmark. I did another
benchmarking run without `--atomic`, and it is indeed about 30 seconds
slower for both cases. But interestingly the relative performance
improvement is still roughly the same:

    Benchmark 1: git fetch +refs/*:refs/* (v2.35.0)
      Time (mean ± σ):     115.587 s ±  2.009 s    [User: 109.874 s, System: 11.305 s]
      Range (min … max):   113.584 s … 118.820 s    5 runs

    Benchmark 2: git fetch +refs/*:refs/* (pks-fetch-pack-optim-v1~)
      Time (mean ± σ):     96.859 s ±  0.624 s    [User: 91.948 s, System: 10.980 s]
      Range (min … max):   96.180 s … 97.875 s    5 runs

    Summary
      'git fetch +refs/*:refs/* (pks-fetch-pack-optim-v1~)' ran
        1.19 ± 0.02 times faster than 'git fetch +refs/*:refs/* (v2.35.0)'

I'll update the commit message to just use this new benchmark so that
the `--atomic` flag doesn't cause any questions.

Patrick