[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Cuirass job names and package variants
From: |
Leo Prikler |
Subject: |
Re: Cuirass job names and package variants |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Jun 2021 16:41:36 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Evolution 3.34.2 |
Am Freitag, den 25.06.2021, 16:30 +0200 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
> Leo Prikler <leo.prikler@student.tugraz.at> skribis:
>
> > Am Freitag, den 25.06.2021, 13:44 +0200 schrieb Ludovic Courtès:
>
> [...]
>
> > > However, variants of a given package have the same package
> > > name/version,
> > > and thus the same job name. Apparently Cuirass only takes the
> > > first
> > > job
> > > with a given name into account and dismisses subsequent ones.
> > >
> > > What would be a good way to address this, either in Cuirass or in
> > > the
> > > user config?
> > Do we already know – or could we compute – store paths at this
> > point in
> > time? It seems as though this could be solved once more by
> > assigning
> > ids based on hashed inputs. So each job-name would be something
> > like
> > (package-name)-(package-version)-(first-bytes-of-package-input-
> > hash).
> > WDYT?
>
> That job names are human-readable is a feature. :-)
>
> However, what we could do is have an autoincrement ID or similar (?)
> rather than the package name used as the actual key. Dunno.
In that case there is nothing to relate jobs to packages, which I'd
assume is also a feature? We could have job names be unique id +
package name, but since those ids grow larger and larger, i think
they'd soon become unreadable as well. Maybe add -1, -2, -3,... to the
job names if a job with the same name is already queued like backup
systems do?