Split cache hashed directory keys to avoid any FS-specific limits #606
Conversation
This file contains 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
Signed-off-by: Daniel Carl Jones <djonesoa@amazon.com>
dannycjones
temporarily deployed
to
PR integration tests
GitHub Actions
Inactive
dannycjones
temporarily deployed
to
PR integration tests
GitHub Actions
Inactive
dannycjones
temporarily deployed
to
PR integration tests
GitHub Actions
Inactive
dannycjones
temporarily deployed
to
PR integration tests
GitHub Actions
Inactive
jamesbornholt
approved these changes
Nov 16, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Description of change
This change ended up being nice and small!
To mitigate risk from FS-specific limits on the number of directory entries, we split the hashed cache key used as a directory name into two, and have two levels of directories. The index where we split is totally arbitrary, this is just what Git uses and I'm sure it works well.
I'm opening this in draft to avoid conflicting with #598. I'd prefer to rebase and merge this after that PR is merged.
Relevant issues:
Does this change impact existing behavior?
No change, this is behind a feature flag for
caching.By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license and I agree to the terms of the Developer Certificate of Origin (DCO).