On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 4:42 PM Jürg Billeter <
j bitron ch> wrote:
[...]
> Should assemble still be putting together the artifact directory
> structure, or do we want to turn the artifact into a proto and store
> that in the ArtifactCache? I mentioned this on a separate thread and
> it's easy to have it be lost: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/buildst
> ream-list/2018-April/msg00038.html
>
> The top level directory then doesn't need to be special cased; we can
> decide what to download from the ArtifactCache entry rather than the
> directory node in CAS. In terms of interface it "feels" cleaner.
The main disadvantage I see is that the CAS server would need to be
aware of these additional proto message types for the purpose of
purging (artifact expiry). Any extension of such a message would
require a CAS server update.
Can you elaborate a bit? I was expecting us to have CAS itself be content agnostic. And for cache management to be done by a different process that is more content aware. Purging would require awares of the contents of ActionCache and ArtifactCache, as well as CAS, right?
Due to this I'm in favor of keeping a directory structure for files,
meta, and logs.
Jürg
Cheers,
Sander
