-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
Use Uni async way to do checksum validation for local downloads #84
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Does this mean there will be an individual request for each checksum ? can we make the folo records into the archive, and verify the checksum against that, to avoid the request to indy. Just an idea, not sure if that is possible.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Hi, @sswguo
Local checksums will read the historical unpack payload directly, so cost would be small, and for remote checksums, will only download the necessary one(s) which local also owns, once validation is done, no other checksums will be downloaded.
For the folo record you suggest, I'm not sure if it will be retrieved before build is coming to end, since this happens at the progress of one build, and report should be still sealed in progress, the folo requests here should be direct to content requests with the corresponding content path, I'm afraid it will not have a better way than this since we need to know the new latest version of content. Corrent me if I'm wrong on this if we have a way to get the whole report on the current progress build.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
@sswguo This is a way to align the version between sidecar(local downloads) and Indy content retrieving, for the archive contents alignment with the current folo record of the finished build, it had some way done from Archive service. From https://issues.redhat.com/browse/MMENG-4251 description, we could know it's not aligned, but not sure misalignment on which service, so it would be safe both would be fixed.
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.
@yma96 thanks for the explanation, looks good for me. ; -)