Mon, 11 Feb 2019 16:34:48 +0300 branchmap: improve doc about BranchMapCache class
Pulkit Goyal <pulkit@yandex-team.ru> [Mon, 11 Feb 2019 16:34:48 +0300] rev 41718
branchmap: improve doc about BranchMapCache class It was confusing that we are having two different branchcache and BranchMapCache classes. The doc in BranchMapCache class was not much helpful to understand the difference. This patch improves the doc there. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D5933
Mon, 04 Feb 2019 19:46:57 +0100 rust: itering less on MissingAncestors.bases for max()
Georges Racinet <georges.racinet@octobus.net> [Mon, 04 Feb 2019 19:46:57 +0100] rev 41717
rust: itering less on MissingAncestors.bases for max() Instead of iterating on the whole `self.bases` each time to find its max, we keep the latter in a separate member attribute and keep it up to date in `add_bases()` On a perfdiscovery done on PyPy, with repos prepared with `contrib/discovery-helper.sh 50 100`, this gives a slight improvement (around 0.5% on wall time, but 10% on CPU) before: ! wall 0.172801 comb 0.180000 user 0.180000 sys 0.000000 (median of 541) after: ! wall 0.171798 comb 0.160000 user 0.160000 sys 0.000000 (median of 551) (perf command run time upped because of bigger variability during this test). Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D5945
Tue, 05 Feb 2019 10:28:32 +0100 rust: stop putting NULL_REVISION in MissingAncestors.bases
Georges Racinet <georges.racinet@octobus.net> [Tue, 05 Feb 2019 10:28:32 +0100] rev 41716
rust: stop putting NULL_REVISION in MissingAncestors.bases As noted in initial review of MissingAncestors, adding NULL_REVISION in constructor in case the given `bases` is empty wasn't really useful, yet it's been kept for identity with the Python implementation Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D5944
Mon, 04 Feb 2019 12:04:59 +0100 rust: less set lookups in MissingAncestors
Georges Racinet <georges.racinet@octobus.net> [Mon, 04 Feb 2019 12:04:59 +0100] rev 41715
rust: less set lookups in MissingAncestors using the return values of HashSet::remove(), we can factor pairs of `contains()/remove()` into a single `remove()`. On a perfdiscovery run done on the PyPy repository, prepared with contrib/discovery-helper.sh 50 100, I do get a modest improvement with this (mean of medians of three runs is better by 2%) Sample readings, before this change: ! wall 0.175609 comb 0.180000 user 0.180000 sys 0.000000 (median of 58) With this change: ! wall 0.171662 comb 0.180000 user 0.170000 sys 0.010000 (median of 60) Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D5943
Mon, 04 Feb 2019 11:39:28 +0100 rust: less set lookups in AncestorsIterator
Georges Racinet <georges.racinet@octobus.net> [Mon, 04 Feb 2019 11:39:28 +0100] rev 41714
rust: less set lookups in AncestorsIterator This uses the boolean return of `HashSet::insert()` to factor pairs of contains()/insert() into a single insert() On the mozilla-central repository (450k changesets), I get about a bit more than 10% better medians in perfancestors (taking the mean of three runs) Best run for parent changeset: ! wall 0.106474 comb 0.110000 user 0.110000 sys 0.000000 (median of 93) Best run for this changeset: ! wall 0.093191 comb 0.090000 user 0.090000 sys 0.000000 (median of 100) Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D5942
Fri, 15 Feb 2019 17:36:57 +0300 obsutil: don't assume leftctx and rightctx repo as same
Pulkit Goyal <pulkit@yandex-team.ru> [Fri, 15 Feb 2019 17:36:57 +0300] rev 41713
obsutil: don't assume leftctx and rightctx repo as same Backed out changeset 520514af2d93. hgsubversion can pass leftctx and rightctx which are instances of two different repositories. This was making tests fail on hgsubversion with 4.9. The two different instances are: (Pdb) p rightctx.repo() <filteredrepo:served <hgsubversion.svnrepo.svnlocalrepo object at 0x7fe29d296d10>> (Pdb) p leftctx.repo() <filteredrepo:visible <hgsubversion.svnrepo.svnlocalrepo object at 0x7fe29d494590>> Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D5968
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -6 +6 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 tip