Mercurial > hg
changeset 39733:5adc5fe41a7d
changegroup: reintroduce some comments that have gotten lost over the years
I got concerned about the correctness of the pruning logic, but I was
misreading it. I didn't figure that out until I walked all the way
back to 0252abaafb8a from 20111, where I was finally able to see (in
the deleted side of the change!) a complete explanation from
b6d9ea0bc107 in 2005.
Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4686
author | Augie Fackler <augie@google.com> |
---|---|
date | Thu, 20 Sep 2018 09:52:59 -0400 |
parents | e03c1a63155c |
children | 9d5c919b6dc3 |
files | mercurial/changegroup.py |
diffstat | 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) [+] |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/mercurial/changegroup.py Wed Sep 19 23:38:30 2018 -0400 +++ b/mercurial/changegroup.py Thu Sep 20 09:52:59 2018 -0400 @@ -1071,8 +1071,14 @@ store = mfl.getstorage(tree) if not self._filematcher.visitdir(store.tree[:-1] or '.'): + # No nodes to send because this directory is out of + # the client's view of the repository (probably + # because of narrow clones). prunednodes = [] else: + # Avoid sending any manifest nodes we can prove the + # client already has by checking linkrevs. See the + # related comment in generatefiles(). prunednodes = self._prunemanifests(store, nodes, commonrevs) if tree and not prunednodes: continue @@ -1164,6 +1170,10 @@ return linkrevnodes[x] frev, flr = filerevlog.rev, filerevlog.linkrev + # Skip sending any filenode we know the client already + # has. This avoids over-sending files relatively + # inexpensively, so it's not a problem if we under-filter + # here. filenodes = [n for n in linkrevnodes if flr(frev(n)) not in commonrevs]