sparse-revlog: implement algorithm to write sparse delta chains (
issue5480)
The classic behavior of revlog._isgooddeltainfo is to consider the span size
of the whole delta chain, and limit it to 4 * textlen.
Once sparse-revlog writing is allowed (and enforced with a requirement),
revlog._isgooddeltainfo considers the span of the largest chunk as the
distance used in the verification, instead of using the span of the whole
delta chain.
In order to compute the span of the largest chunk, we need to slice into
chunks a chain with the new revision at the top of the revlog, and take the
maximal span of these chunks. The sparse read density is a parameter to the
slicing, as it will stop when the global read density reaches this threshold.
For instance, a density of 50% means that 2 of 4 read bytes are actually used
for the reconstruction of the revision (the others are part of other chains).
This allows a new revision to be potentially stored with a diff against
another revision anywhere in the history, instead of forcing it in the last 4
* textlen. The result is a much better compression on repositories that have
many concurrent branches. Here are a comparison between using deltas from
current upstream (aggressive-merge-deltas on by default) and deltas from a
sparse-revlog
Comparison of `.hg/store/` size:
mercurial (6.74% merges):
before: 46,831,873 bytes
after: 46,795,992 bytes (no relevant change)
pypy (8.30% merges):
before: 333,524,651 bytes
after: 308,417,511 bytes -8%
netbeans (34.21% merges):
before: 1,141,847,554 bytes
after: 1,131,093,161 bytes -1%
mozilla-central (4.84% merges):
before: 2,344,248,850 bytes
after: 2,328,459,258 bytes -1%
large-private-repo-A (merge 19.73%)
before: 41,510,550,163 bytes
after: 8,121,763,428 bytes -80%
large-private-repo-B (23.77%)
before: 58,702,221,709 bytes
after: 8,351,588,828 bytes -76%
Comparison of `00manifest.d` size:
mercurial (6.74% merges):
before: 6,143,044 bytes
after: 6,107,163 bytes
pypy (8.30% merges):
before: 52,941,780 bytes
after: 27,834,082 bytes -48%
netbeans (34.21% merges):
before: 130,088,982 bytes
after: 119,337,636 bytes -10%
mozilla-central (4.84% merges):
before: 215,096,339 bytes
after: 199,496,863 bytes -8%
large-private-repo-A (merge 19.73%)
before: 33,725,285,081 bytes
after: 390,302,545 bytes -99%
large-private-repo-B (23.77%)
before: 49,457,701,645 bytes
after: 1,366,752,187 bytes -97%
The better delta chains provide a performance boost in relevant repositories:
pypy, bundling 1000 revisions:
before: 1.670s
after: 1.149s -31%
Unbundling got a bit slower. probably because the sparse algorithm is still
pure
python.
pypy, unbundling 1000 revisions:
before: 4.062s
after: 4.507s +10%
Performance of bundle/unbundle in repository with few concurrent branches (eg:
mercurial) are unaffected.
No significant differences have been noticed then timing `hg push` and `hg
pull` locally. More state timings are being gathered.
Same as for aggressive-merge-delta, better delta comes with longer delta
chains. Longer chains have a performance impact. For example. The length of
the chain needed to get the manifest of pypy's tip moves from 82 item to 1929
items. This moves the restore time from 3.88ms to 11.3ms.
Delta chain length is an independent issue that affects repository without
this changes. It will be dealt with independently.
No significant differences have been observed on repositories where
`sparse-revlog` have not much effect (mercurial, unity, netbeans). On pypy,
small differences have been observed on some operation affected by delta chain
building and retrieval.
pypy, perfmanifest
before: 0.006162s
after: 0.017899s +190%
pypy, commit:
before: 0.382
after: 0.376 -1%
pypy, status:
before: 0.157
after: 0.168 +7%
More comprehensive and stable timing comparisons are in progress.
This test test the low-level definition of stack, agnostic from all formatting
Initial setup
$ cat << EOF >> $HGRCPATH
> [ui]
> logtemplate = {rev} {branch} {phase} {desc|firstline}\n
> [extensions]
> rebase=
> [experimental]
> evolution=createmarkers,exchange,allowunstable
> EOF
$ hg init main
$ cd main
$ hg branch other
marked working directory as branch other
(branches are permanent and global, did you want a bookmark?)
$ echo aaa > aaa
$ hg add aaa
$ hg commit -m c_a
$ echo aaa > bbb
$ hg add bbb
$ hg commit -m c_b
$ hg branch foo
marked working directory as branch foo
$ echo aaa > ccc
$ hg add ccc
$ hg commit -m c_c
$ echo aaa > ddd
$ hg add ddd
$ hg commit -m c_d
$ echo aaa > eee
$ hg add eee
$ hg commit -m c_e
$ echo aaa > fff
$ hg add fff
$ hg commit -m c_f
$ hg log -G
@ 5 foo draft c_f
|
o 4 foo draft c_e
|
o 3 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other draft c_b
|
o 0 other draft c_a
Check that stack doesn't include public changesets
--------------------------------------------------
$ hg up other
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 4 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 1 other draft c_b
|
o 0 other draft c_a
$ hg phase --public 'branch("other")'
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
$ hg up foo
4 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
Simple test
-----------
'stack()' list all changeset in the branch
$ hg branch
foo
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 5 foo draft c_f
|
o 4 foo draft c_e
|
o 3 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
~
Case with some of the branch unstable
------------------------------------
$ hg up 3
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 2 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo bbb > ddd
$ hg commit --amend
2 new orphan changesets
$ hg log -G
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
| * 5 foo draft c_f
| |
| * 4 foo draft c_e
| |
| x 3 foo draft c_d
|/
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
~
$ hg up -r "desc(c_e)"
2 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 4 foo draft c_e
|
x 3 foo draft c_d
|
~
$ hg up -r "desc(c_d)"
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
~
Case with multiple topological heads
------------------------------------
Make things linear again
$ hg rebase -s 'desc(c_e)' -d 'desc(c_d) - obsolete()'
rebasing 4:4f2a69f6d380 "c_e"
rebasing 5:913c298d8b0a "c_f"
$ hg log -G
o 8 foo draft c_f
|
o 7 foo draft c_e
|
@ 6 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
Create the second branch
$ hg up 'desc(c_d)'
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo aaa > ggg
$ hg add ggg
$ hg commit -m c_g
created new head
$ echo aaa > hhh
$ hg add hhh
$ hg commit -m c_h
$ hg log -G
@ 10 foo draft c_h
|
o 9 foo draft c_g
|
| o 8 foo draft c_f
| |
| o 7 foo draft c_e
|/
o 6 foo draft c_d
|
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
Test output
$ hg log -G -r "stack(10)"
@ 10 foo draft c_h
|
o 9 foo draft c_g
|
~
$ hg log -G -r "stack(8)"
o 8 foo draft c_f
|
o 7 foo draft c_e
|
~
$ hg log -G -r "stack(head())"
@ 10 foo draft c_h
|
o 9 foo draft c_g
|
~
o 8 foo draft c_f
|
o 7 foo draft c_e
|
~
Check the stack order
$ hg log -r "first(stack())"
9 foo draft c_g
$ hg log -r "first(stack(10))"
9 foo draft c_g
$ hg log -r "first(stack(8))"
7 foo draft c_e
$ hg log -r "first(stack(head()))"
7 foo draft c_e
Case with multiple heads with unstability involved
--------------------------------------------------
We amend the message to make sure the display base pick the right changeset
$ hg up 'desc(c_d)'
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 2 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo ccc > ddd
$ hg commit --amend -m 'c_D'
4 new orphan changesets
$ hg rebase -d . -s 'desc(c_g)'
rebasing 9:2ebb6e48ab8a "c_g"
rebasing 10:634f38e27a1d "c_h"
$ hg log -G
o 13 foo draft c_h
|
o 12 foo draft c_g
|
@ 11 foo draft c_D
|
| * 8 foo draft c_f
| |
| * 7 foo draft c_e
| |
| x 6 foo draft c_d
|/
o 2 foo draft c_c
|
o 1 other public c_b
|
o 0 other public c_a
We should improve stack definition to also show 12 and 13 here
$ hg log -G -r "stack()"
@ 11 foo draft c_D
|
~