Track authors by step rather than transaction #1385
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
Signed-off-by: Julius Härtl <jus@bitgrid.net>
|
Cypress test that failed at the first attempt is known to be somehow unstable |
ChristophWurst
approved these changes
Jan 26, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Since applying transactions has quite a big performance impact the initial approach of tracking the author in a blame map based on a per transaction level didn't work out well in terms of memory usage and computation time when loading a document with a somehow bigger amount of steps, since before this pr each step would be dispatched as its own transaction.
Now with this we pass through the author information for all steps in one transaction, apply it in one go and build the blame map of authors based on the individual steps.
Should fix the performance and memory usage regression that was reported by @jancborchardt and @jospoortvliet