From 6043a2c7a055255b9f642ef29e32b1d699f49930 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: yarikoptic Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 17:36:16 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment --- ...omment_30_386c0cfe688effb1543ffd01a54717e0._comment | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/bugs/significant_performance_regression_impacting_datal/comment_30_386c0cfe688effb1543ffd01a54717e0._comment diff --git a/doc/bugs/significant_performance_regression_impacting_datal/comment_30_386c0cfe688effb1543ffd01a54717e0._comment b/doc/bugs/significant_performance_regression_impacting_datal/comment_30_386c0cfe688effb1543ffd01a54717e0._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..6ab1c624aa --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/bugs/significant_performance_regression_impacting_datal/comment_30_386c0cfe688effb1543ffd01a54717e0._comment @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="yarikoptic" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/f11e9c84cb18d26a1748c33b48c924b4" + subject="comment 30" + date="2021-06-14T17:36:16Z" + content=""" +> The same needs to also hold true for unlocked files, and so it has to check if foo is an unlocked pointer to K and populate the file with the content. + +but that should only needs to be done iff K became present/known whenever it was not present before. If K is already known (e.g. was just added for another file, or may be was added in previous \"commit\") no such checks are needed since those files could be expected to already be populated. Right? +"""]]