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

Implement caching without PVC? #535

Closed
michaelsauter opened this issue May 31, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

Implement caching without PVC? #535

michaelsauter opened this issue May 31, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@michaelsauter
Copy link
Member

Currently the caching mechanism works by using one PVC for all pipelines of one repository. This has consequences on how many pipelines can run in parallel. We may want to rethink the caching approach. One alternative may be to create a gzipped tarball, upload it somewhere (e.g. pipeline manager) and download it at the beginning of the pipeline when appropriate. This could work for both dependency cache and build cache.

See also tektoncd/pipeline#3097 (comment).

@michaelsauter michaelsauter added the question Further information is requested label May 31, 2022
@michaelsauter michaelsauter changed the title Implement caching without PVC Implement caching without PVC? May 31, 2022
@henrjk
Copy link
Member

henrjk commented Jun 2, 2022

I am doubtful that having the caches' content gzipped uploaded/downloaded would be viable from a performance angle.
At the moment my working assumption is that the lack of parallelism is mitigated by build skipping and dependency caching. What scenarios make you want to increase parallelism?
On the other hand one could perhaps enable experimentation towards this, by enabling pipelines without a PVC at all if that even is feasible where the build file system would be on local file storage.

@michaelsauter
Copy link
Member Author

@henrjk I actually share your doubts regarding performance. Also, there is no use case right now that has reported a need for more parallelism. That said, in a repo with very long builds (think 20min+ or so), we could run into issues pretty quickly. Therefore I wanted to note this alternative down here. I do not see an immediate need to action on it, but it would be nice to collect thoughts and potentially run an experiment at some point.

@michaelsauter
Copy link
Member Author

Closing this for now. We can revisit this when problems arise with the PVC approach currently in use. When that time comes, there may be new solutions in Tekton / OpenShift Pipelines that we can make use of then.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants