Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On 30.06.13 19:28, Ramsay Jones wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> You have just described my second patch! :D
>> Unfortunately, I have not had any time to work on the patch this weekend.
>> However, despite the patch being a bit rough around the edges, I decided
>> to send it out (
On 30.06.13 19:28, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> Ramsay Jones wrote:
>> Michael Haggerty wrote:
>>> On 06/27/2013 12:35 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>> [ ... ]
I think Michael's assessment above is missing one thing.
>>> Peff is absolutely right; for some unknown reason I was thinking of the
>>> consistency c
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I like the part that gets rid of that "get-mode-bits" but at the
> same time, I find this part wanting a reasonable in-code comment.
Indeed. (As I said, a bit rough around the edges ;-)
> At least, with the earlier get-mode-bits, it was clear why we are
> doing something s
Ramsay Jones writes:
> Ramsay Jones wrote:
>> Michael Haggerty wrote:
>>> On 06/27/2013 12:35 AM, Jeff King wrote:
>> [ ... ]
I think Michael's assessment above is missing one thing.
>>>
>>> Peff is absolutely right; for some unknown reason I was thinking of the
>>> consistency check as havi
Ramsay Jones wrote:
> Michael Haggerty wrote:
>> On 06/27/2013 12:35 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> [ ... ]
>>> I think Michael's assessment above is missing one thing.
>>
>> Peff is absolutely right; for some unknown reason I was thinking of the
>> consistency check as having been already fixed.
>
> Well
On 06/27/2013 06:58 PM, Ramsay Jones wrote:
This is why I tried the "cygwin: Remove the Win32 l/stat()
functions" patch first; I think this is the correct approach
to fixing this problem (and similar *future* problems).
I adamantly agree.
However, since that is no longer an option, on performa
Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 12:35 AM, Jeff King wrote:
[ ... ]
>> I think Michael's assessment above is missing one thing.
>
> Peff is absolutely right; for some unknown reason I was thinking of the
> consistency check as having been already fixed.
Well, the "cygwin: Remove the Win32
Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
[ ... ]
>>> (And have a look how to improve the core.filemode)
>>
>> I don't understand this (parenthetical) comment; could you
>> elaborate on this.
>>
> This is probably wrong information:
> I had in mind that cygwin sets core.filemode=false,
It does, see commit c86
Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:35:52PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> I am curious how often Cygwin gives us the false positive. If it is
>> every time, then the check is not doing much good at all. Is it possible
>> for you to instrument stat_validity_check to report how often it doe
Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:45:48PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
[ ... ]
> I think Michael's assessment above is missing one thing. It is true that
> a false positive is just a performance problem in most cases, as we
> unnecessarily reload the file, thinking it has changed.
>
> Ho
Jeff King writes:
>> But, taking a step back, I think it is a bad idea to have an unreliable
>> stat() masquerading as a real stat(). If we want to allow the use of an
>> unreliable stat for certain purposes, let's have two stat() interfaces:
>>
>> * the true stat() (in this case I guess cygwin
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 07:51:57AM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote:
> > In theory we can drop the safety valve; it should never actually happen.
> > But I'd like to keep it there for working systems. Perhaps it is worth
> > doing something like this:
> >
> > [...#ifdef out consistency check on cygw
On 2013-06-26 23.54, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
>> On 2013-06-25 23.18, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> Johannes Sixt writes:
>>>
Some context: This is about a patch by Ramsay that removes the
"schizophrenic lstat" hack for Cygwin. Junio, can you please queue that
p
On 06/27/2013 12:35 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:45:48PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>
>>> This patch adds some *extra* cache invalidation that was heretofore
>>> missing. If stat() is broken it could
>>>
>>> (a) cause a false positive, resulting in some unnecessary cache
>>>
On 06/26/2013 10:19 AM, Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
On 2013-06-25 23.18, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Johannes Sixt writes:
Some context: This is about a patch by Ramsay that removes the
"schizophrenic lstat" hack for Cygwin. Junio, can you please queue that
patch in pu?
Sure. Thanks.
First of al
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 06:35:52PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> I am curious how often Cygwin gives us the false positive. If it is
> every time, then the check is not doing much good at all. Is it possible
> for you to instrument stat_validity_check to report how often it does or
> does not do anyth
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:45:48PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> > This patch adds some *extra* cache invalidation that was heretofore
> > missing. If stat() is broken it could
> >
> > (a) cause a false positive, resulting in some unnecessary cache
> > invalidation and re-reading of packed-refs,
Michael Haggerty wrote:
> On 06/25/2013 07:07 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Ramsay Jones writes:
>>
>>> Michael Haggerty and Jeff King have been re-vamping the reference
>>> handling code. The failures noted above were provoked by patches
>>> in the 'mh/ref-races' branch. At the time I wrote this p
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ramsay Jones writes:
>
>> Michael Haggerty and Jeff King have been re-vamping the reference
>> handling code. The failures noted above were provoked by patches
>> in the 'mh/ref-races' branch. At the time I wrote this patch, that
>> branch was only included in 'pu', but I
Torsten Bögershausen wrote:
> On 2013-06-25 23.18, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Johannes Sixt writes:
>>
>>> Some context: This is about a patch by Ramsay that removes the
>>> "schizophrenic lstat" hack for Cygwin. Junio, can you please queue that
>>> patch in pu?
>>
>> Sure. Thanks.
>
> First of al
On 2013-06-25 23.18, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Sixt writes:
>
>> Some context: This is about a patch by Ramsay that removes the
>> "schizophrenic lstat" hack for Cygwin. Junio, can you please queue that
>> patch in pu?
>
> Sure. Thanks.
First of all,
thanks for the work.
Here some "ben
Johannes Sixt writes:
> Some context: This is about a patch by Ramsay that removes the
> "schizophrenic lstat" hack for Cygwin. Junio, can you please queue that
> patch in pu?
Sure. Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@v
On 25.06.13 21:23, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 25.06.2013 00:10, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> Mark Levedahl writes:
>>
>>> On 06/22/2013 03:38 PM, Ramsay Jones wrote:
Also, apart from running the git test-suite, I have the Win32
l/stat functions disabled on all of my repos. In particular, I
Am 25.06.2013 00:10, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Mark Levedahl writes:
>
>> On 06/22/2013 03:38 PM, Ramsay Jones wrote:
>>> Also, apart from running the git test-suite, I have the Win32
>>> l/stat functions disabled on all of my repos. In particular, I have
>>> core.filemode set to true. (At one po
24 matches
Mail list logo