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

Support compressed Bytestream transfers for remote execution #12670

Closed
bergsieker opened this issue Dec 9, 2020 · 6 comments
Closed

Support compressed Bytestream transfers for remote execution #12670

bergsieker opened this issue Dec 9, 2020 · 6 comments
Assignees
Labels
P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) team-Remote-Exec Issues and PRs for the Execution (Remote) team type: feature request

Comments

@bergsieker
Copy link

Description of the problem / feature request:

The RE API is close to finalizing support for API-level compression on Bytestream (bazelbuild/remote-apis#168). Using compression is optional, but Bazel should support it at some point.

Feature requests: what underlying problem are you trying to solve with this feature?

Remote builds can use significant bandwidth. Compression reduces the bandwidth used, which can also lead to significant performance improvements for bandwidth-constrained network connections.

What operating system are you running Bazel on?

This applies to all operating systems that Bazel supports.

@bergsieker
Copy link
Author

Assigning to Philipp for triage and prioritization.

@philwo philwo added team-Remote-Exec Issues and PRs for the Execution (Remote) team untriaged labels Dec 9, 2020
@philwo philwo assigned coeuvre and unassigned philwo Dec 9, 2020
@philwo
Copy link
Member

philwo commented Dec 9, 2020

@coeuvre Could you have a look and apply a P-label that you deem correct? :)

Quick guidance:

  • P0: This is an emergency and more important than other current work. (Assignee required)
  • P1: I'll work on this now. (Assignee required)
  • P2: We'll consider to work on this in future. (Assignee optional)
  • P3: We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee)
  • P4: This is probably out of scope and will be closed soon. (No assignee)

@coeuvre coeuvre added P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) and removed untriaged labels Dec 10, 2020
@coeuvre
Copy link
Member

coeuvre commented Dec 10, 2020

Thanks. I am happy to implement this.

@chancila
Copy link
Contributor

any movement on this feature?

@philwo
Copy link
Member

philwo commented Jul 23, 2021

@chancila Thanks for checking in! I actually just this week thought of it and have found a colleague who would like to implement it :) We'll follow up with details here soon.

@coeuvre
Copy link
Member

coeuvre commented Nov 26, 2021

Closing since this is implemented by #14041.

@coeuvre coeuvre closed this as completed Nov 26, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P2 We'll consider working on this in future. (Assignee optional) team-Remote-Exec Issues and PRs for the Execution (Remote) team type: feature request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants