Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 05:35:06PM +0100, Andreas Krey wrote: > >> The code talks about limiting the size >> of the rename matrix, but as far as I >> can see, the matrix itself never exists >> as such, and the only thing that could >> actually overflow is the computation >> for the progress indication. This >> can be fixed by reporting just the >> destinations checked instead of the >> combinations, since we only update >> the progress once per destination >> anyway. > > I didn't dig in the archive, but I think we discussed the "just show > progress for destinations" before. The problem you run into is that the > items aren't a good indication of the amount of work. You really are > doing n*m work, so if you just count "m", it can be very misleading if > "n" is high (and vice versa).
Right. With s/never exists/no longer exists/ in the above observation, I agree that this topic is sensible that it revisits the stale comment from days back when we did use the matrix. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
