Simon Tournier <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> writes: > Hi, > > On Wed, 02 Apr 2025 at 09:01, 45mg <45mg.wri...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> 1) Actual 'git pull' equivalent. >>> >>> 2) The 'guix authenticate' dance on the commits. >>> >>> 3) The Guix derivation part. >>> >>> In some settings, I fear step 1 and 2 takes comparable time as 3. >> >> In my experience, authentication is pretty fast. `guix git authenticate` >> processes hundreds of commits in under a second. > > Yes. Although it could be a bit improved – see [1] – that’s not the > main bottleneck, from my experience too.
Agreed. Back when I was messing with the authentication code to figure out how to do authenticated forks, it quickly became clear that the rate-limiting step within authentication is the verification of individual commits. I didn't see any way to optimize that. The bit before that - calling `commit-difference` to get the set of commits to authenticate - rarely takes more than a second or two, even when authenticating from scratch. [...] > Could you share the output of > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > scheme@(guix-user)> ,use(git) > scheme@(guix-user)> ,use(guix git) > scheme@(guix-user)> (define url "https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/guix.git";) > scheme@(guix-user)> (define cache-directory (url-cache-directory url > (%repository-cache-directory))) > scheme@(guix-user)> (openable-repository? cache-directory) > $1 = #t > scheme@(guix-user)> cache-directory > $2 = > "/home/simon/.cache/guix/checkouts/pjmkglp4t7znuugeurpurzikxq3tnlaywmisyr27shj7apsnalwq" > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > ? I guess, openable-repository? returns #f instead of #t, right? No, it returns #t; contrary to what I suspected, the caching is actually done correctly. See my previous message. > Well, I think the issue is from update-cached-checkout in (guix git)… > # >> It's probably a bug with the caching; I pull from a local authenticated >> fork, which can't be too common, so it makes sense that this hasn't been >> caught before. I haven't had time to properly debug it yet (deleting the >> cache does not help). > > …and something along: > > (let* ((cache-exists? (openable-repository? cache-directory)) > (repository (if cache-exists? > (repository-open cache-directory) > (clone/swh-fallback url ref cache-directory > #:verify-certificate? > verify-certificate?)))) > ;; Only fetch remote if it has not been cloned just before. > (when (and cache-exists? > (not (reference-available? repository ref))) > (remote-fetch (remote-lookup repository "origin") > #:fetch-options (make-default-fetch-options > #:verify-certificate? > verify-certificate?))) > > Therefore, that’s why my guess is about openable-repository? Yup, it's the `remote-fetch` part. Again, see my previous message. > Cheers, > simon > > > 1: comparing commit-relation using Scheme+libgit2 vs shellout plumbing Git > Simon Tournier <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> > Tue, 12 Sep 2023 00:48:30 +0200 > id:865y4gz5q9....@gmail.com > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-09 > https://yhetil.org/guix/865y4gz5q9....@gmail.com > > 2: bug#65787: time-machine is doing too much network requests > Simon Tournier <zimon.touto...@gmail.com> > Wed, 06 Sep 2023 18:26:18 +0200 > id:87wmx3mfo5....@gmail.com > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/65787 > https://issues.guix.gnu.org/msgid/87wmx3mfo5....@gmail.com > https://yhetil.org/guix/87wmx3mfo5....@gmail.com
