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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update the binary index before attempting direct fetches #32137
Update the binary index before attempting direct fetches #32137
Changes from all commits
9ad3115
d02a514
b2f0f37
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And as far as I can see: this does not help across two
spack install
calls :(There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was concern for sequences of operations like:
If the fetch timers spanned
spack install
commands, the latterspack install
may (surprisingly) not see the effect of thespack buildcache update-index
. Same logic as to whyupdate()
has awith_cooldown=False
argument.Note that
index.json.hash
gets fetched first beforeindex.json
(or at least, it's supposed to). So if theindex.json
didn't change between calls it won't be fetched a second time.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We otherwise invalidate cache by mtime, I was thinking it could make sense not to even make a request if (now - mtime) is small enough.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This bothers me too about this PR. Please do not make read operations do write operations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Caches as a general rule do a write operation on cache miss. That's what's happening here. This should be normal and I was very surprised to find it not doing something like this before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What you wrote is more wrong than the previous implementation was wrong. The point is to do a local existence check to order the mirrors. That should never trigger a remote fetch on failure.