Fri, 26 Aug 2022 11:36:20 +0100 tests: remove flakiness in test-nointerrupt.t stable
Arseniy Alekseyev <aalekseyev@janestreet.com> [Fri, 26 Aug 2022 11:36:20 +0100] rev 49446
tests: remove flakiness in test-nointerrupt.t The problem was that the reaction to the signal was racing against the completion of the command. Since reaction to the signal is to print a line of warning, we can fix this by waiting for that warning to appear before allowing the command to complete.
Thu, 25 Aug 2022 05:12:25 +0200 perf: properly process formatter option in perf::unbundle
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 25 Aug 2022 05:12:25 +0200] rev 49445
perf: properly process formatter option in perf::unbundle Otherwise, the options are not understood.
Thu, 25 Aug 2022 05:11:48 +0200 perf: quiet stdout output in perf::unbundle
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 25 Aug 2022 05:11:48 +0200] rev 49444
perf: quiet stdout output in perf::unbundle There a lot of repetitive bundle application message we do not care about.
Thu, 25 Aug 2022 05:10:55 +0200 perf: quiet stderr output in perf::unbundle
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Thu, 25 Aug 2022 05:10:55 +0200] rev 49443
perf: quiet stderr output in perf::unbundle There a lot of repetitive transaction message we do not care about.
Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:31:27 -0400 bisect: avoid adding irrelevant revisions to bisect state
Arun Kulshreshtha <akulshreshtha@janestreet.com> [Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:31:27 -0400] rev 49442
bisect: avoid adding irrelevant revisions to bisect state When adding new revisions to the bisect state, it only makes sense to add information about revisions that are under consideration (i.e., those that are topologically between the known good and bad revisions). However, if the user passes in a revset (e.g., '!merge()' to exclude merge commits), hg will resolve the revset first and add all matching revisions to the bisect state (which in this case would likely be the majority of revisions in the repo). To avoid this, revisions should only be added to the bisect state if they are between the good and bad revisions (and therefore relevant to the bisection). -- Here are the results of some performance tests using the `mozilla-central` repo (since it is one of the largest freely-available hg repositories in the wild). These tests compare the performance of a locally-built `hg` before and after application of this series. Note that `--noupdate` is passed to avoid including update time (which should not vary across cases). Setup (run between each test): $ hg bisect --reset $ hg bisect --noupdate --bad 56c3ad4bde5c70714b784ccf15d099e0df0f5bde $ hg bisect --noupdate --good 57426696adaf08298af3027fa77486fee0633b13 Test using a revset that returns a very large number of revisions: $ time hg bisect --noupdate --skip '!merge()' > /dev/null Before: real 0m9.398s user 0m9.233s sys 0m0.120s After: real 0m1.513s user 0m1.425s sys 0m0.052s Test using a revset that is expensive to compute: $ time hg bisect --noupdate --skip 'desc("Bug")' > /dev/null Before: real 0m49.853s user 0m49.580s sys 0m0.243s After: real 0m4.120s user 0m4.036s sys 0m0.048s
Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:31:19 -0400 bisect: limit ancestors to revs topologically between good and bad revs
Arun Kulshreshtha <akulshreshtha@janestreet.com> [Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:31:19 -0400] rev 49441
bisect: limit ancestors to revs topologically between good and bad revs Previously, when constructing its dict of revisions to their ancestors, bisect would populate the dict with ALL of the descendents of the good set, which is a bit silly because it is impossible for a revision that is a descendent of the minimum known bad revision to be the first bad rev. Instead it makes more sense to limit the revisions to just those topologically between the good and bad.
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -6 +6 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 tip