Skip to content
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

Simplify caching by reducing launch+cache outcomes #35

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 20, 2019

Conversation

sclevine
Copy link
Member

This would increase buildpack portability between platforms that provide fully-coherent caching and platforms that do not.

I'm not convinced this is a good idea (as it will hurt performance in some cases), but I'm opening this PR for discussion.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Levine <stephen.levine@gmail.com>
@sclevine sclevine requested review from nebhale, hone and jkutner January 21, 2019 01:09
Signed-off-by: Stephen Levine <stephen.levine@gmail.com>
@sclevine
Copy link
Member Author

One reason I'm giving this more consideration than in the past:

The performance hit for node_modules can be worked around (without broken symlinks) using two layers (now that a layer can be both launch = true and build = true). Simplifying the API and improving portability may be worth adding complexity to highly-optimized buildpacks.

@sclevine
Copy link
Member Author

Another note: this reduces complexity around layers that are marked launch = true + build = true + cache = true. These layers already skip the metadata-only case. With this PR, the build property could be ignored by the exporter/analyzer entirely.

@ekcasey I think you brought this up at one point.

@sclevine sclevine merged commit 446593e into master Feb 20, 2019
@sclevine sclevine mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2019
@nebhale nebhale deleted the simplify-caching branch August 30, 2019 17:14
danielleadams pushed a commit to danielleadams/spec that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2020
nebhale pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants