User Details
- User Since
- Sep 7 2015, 3:43 PM (286 w, 2 d)
- Roles
- Administrator
Yesterday
Mon, Mar 1
Sat, Feb 27
Fri, Feb 26
Wed, Feb 24
@KShivendu it sounds like you haven't installed the various swh-* modules with pip -e. Did you follow the https://docs.softwareheritage.org/devel/developer-setup.html#developer-setup ? Steps in there should take care of that.
Fri, Feb 19
Thu, Feb 18
I've only added a nitpicky comment about docstrings.
Tue, Feb 16
Thanks for this summary/status, very useful. Regarding goals, I think we want to have a read goal also about time to first bite, which is a performance metric which is particularly bad in the current filesystem-based object storage. Not sure what would be a reasonable goal though. Poke @olasd: any idea about a good target for this?
I'm not approving (and only resigning as reviewer instead) just to allow others to have a look, given it's something quite foundational in the data model.
Mon, Feb 15
followed sequence of:
Size of SHA256, SWHID, Content
SHA256
SWHID
Content
The object storage is a collection of RBD images containing a sequence of objects (SHA256 + SWHID + content).
(I've finally caught up with the backlog in this task, sorry I'm late to the party.)
Sat, Feb 13
(thanks for this!)
Tue, Feb 9
Mon, Feb 8
Fri, Feb 5
Thu, Feb 4
I'm requesting changes as the idea of hexlifying URLs behind the "swh:1:ori:" prefix is still being discussed (on the swh-devel list) and, for now, I'm against that specific part of the proposal.
Wed, Feb 3
Awesome!, thanks.
Tue, Feb 2
Feb 1 2021
Jan 30 2021
Jan 28 2021
Jan 26 2021
for context: this change is only going to be committed in a separate branch that we're using for experiments with swh-scanner, hence the testing requirements are different/lower than for master
Jan 21 2021
Jan 20 2021
Jan 19 2021
Jan 18 2021
ah, yes, of course, sorry I didn't notice this either in the previous diff :-)
Jan 15 2021
Why do we still have tests that check error messages meant for human consumption, again? :-)
If the difference in how they fail is meaningful (which I don't know), they should raise different exceptions and we should just check their types.
Jan 14 2021
Jan 13 2021
looks great, thanks !
Jan 11 2021
Jan 9 2021
Thanks for the bug report. Do you have a log of what happens upon bin/update if pre-commit is missing? (it's sure is needed for committing, but i'm surprised it's needed for bin/update).
Also, is it needed for a raw "bin/update" or only for "bin/update -i" (that also install Python dependencies?).
oh, also, this diff should close T2647 in its commit message
Jan 8 2021
Jan 7 2021
note that this diff should close T2595, so the commit message should be updated
My answer is a very emphatic YES.
Jan 6 2021
Jan 5 2021
Jan 4 2021
I don't like this "asymmetric" approach much. I'd rather have both caches being equal and taking as class constructor input an optional sqlite connection. If it's None, they'll each create a connection (and not share it). If a connection is passed, they use it and do not close it on exit. Then, the init code in FuseCache takes care of initializing the shared sqlite connection, and passing it to both constructors. This will make the classes more reusable and the init code more clean.