Please sign in to comment.
rebase: define linearization ordering and enforce it
Ever since commit 3f21398 ("add tests for rebasing merged history", 2013-06-06), t3425 has had tests which included the rebasing of merged history and whose order of applied commits was checked. Unfortunately, the tests expected different behavior depending on which backend was in use. Implementing these checks was the following four lines (including the TODO message) which were repeated verbatim three times in t3425: #TODO: make order consistent across all flavors of rebase test_run_rebase success 'e n o' '' test_run_rebase success 'e n o' -m test_run_rebase success 'n o e' -i As part of the effort to reduce differences between the rebase backends so that users get more uniform behavior, let's define the correct behavior and modify the different backends so they all get the right answer. It turns out that the difference in behavior here is entirely due to topological sorting; since some backends require topological sorting (particularly when --rebase-merges is specified), require it for all modes. Modify the am and merge backends to implement this. Performance Considerations: I was unable to measure any appreciable performance difference with this change. Trying to control the run-to-run variation was difficult; I eventually found a headless beefy box that I could ssh into, which seemed to help. Using git.git, I ran the following testcase: $ git reset --hard v2.20.0-rc1~2 $ time git rebase --quiet v2.20.0-rc0~16 I first ran once to warm any disk caches, then ran five subsequent runs and recorded the times of those five. I observed the following results for the average time: Before this change: "real" timing: 1.340s (standard deviation: 0.040s) "user" timing: 1.050s (standard deviation: 0.041s) "sys" timing: 0.270s (standard deviation: 0.011s) After this change: "real" timing: 1.327s (standard deviation: 0.065s) "user" timing: 1.031s (standard deviation: 0.061s) "sys" timing: 0.280s (standard deviation: 0.014s) Measurements aside, I would expect the timing for walking revisions to be dwarfed by the work involved in creating and applying patches, so this isn't too surprising. Further, while somewhat counter-intuitive, it is possible that turning on topological sorting is actually a performance improvement: by way of comparison, turning on --topo-order made fast-export faster (see https://public-inbox.org/git/20090211135640.GA19600@coredump.intra.peff.net/). Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <email@example.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Loading branch information...
Showing with 8 additions and 11 deletions.