Re: Proposal for Remote Execution

[Jürg Billeter <j bitron ch>]

Hi,

On Wed, 2018-05-30 at 13:40 +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 10:37 PM Jürg Billeter <j bitron ch> wrote:
> [...]
>
> > The artifact directory structure (files, meta, logs) will be created locally
> > using the virtual file system API, and uploaded to the remote CAS as part of
> > the push job, if push is enabled.
>
> 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.

Due to this I'm in favor of keeping a directory structure for files,
meta, and logs.

Jürg