git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Mark Hills <mark@xwax.org>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
Subject: Re: Consist timestamps within a checkout/clone
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2022 18:46:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <221101.86bkpq4jan.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a87ebafd-c83-7a1d-d8d2-953bc9a93184@xwax.org>


On Mon, Oct 31 2022, Mark Hills wrote:

> On Mon, 31 Oct 2022, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>> 
>> On Mon, Oct 31 2022, Mark Hills wrote:
>> 
>> > Our use case: we commit some compiled objects to the repo, where compiling 
>> > is either slow or requires software which is not always available.
>> >
>> > Since upgrading Git 2.26.3 -> 2.32.4 (as part of Alpine Linux OS upgrade) 
>> > we are noticing a change in build behaviour.
>> >
>> > Now, after a "git clone" we find the Makefile intermittently attempting 
>> > (and failing) some builds that are not intended.
>> >
>> > Indeed, Make is acting reasonably as the source file is sometimes 
>> > marginally newer than the destination (both checked out by Git), example 
>> > below.
>> >
>> > I've never had to consider consistency timestamps within a Git checkout 
>> > until now.
>> >
>> > It's entirely possible there's _never_ a guarantee of consistency here.
>> >
>> > But then something has certainly changed in practice, as this fault has 
>> > gone from never happening to now every couple of days.
>> >
>> > Imaginging I can't be the first person to encounter this, I searched for 
>> > existing threads or docs, but overwhemingly the results were question of 
>> > Git tracking the timestamps (as part of the commit) which this is not; 
>> > it's consistency within one checkout.
>> >
>> > $ git clone --depth 1 file:///path/to/repo.git
>> >
>> > $ stat winner.jpeg
>> >   File: winner.jpeg
>> >   Size: 258243          Blocks: 520        IO Block: 4096   regular file
>> > Device: fd07h/64775d    Inode: 33696       Links: 1
>> > Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--)  Uid: (  106/ luthier)   Gid: (  106/ luthier)
>> > Access: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.756858496 +0000
>> > Modify: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.756858496 +0000
>> > Change: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.756858496 +0000
>> >  Birth: -
>> >
>> > $ stat winner.svg
>> >   File: winner.svg
>> >   Size: 52685           Blocks: 112        IO Block: 4096   regular file
>> > Device: fd07h/64775d    Inode: 33697       Links: 1
>> > Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--)  Uid: (  106/ luthier)   Gid: (  106/ luthier)
>> > Access: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.766859030 +0000
>> > Modify: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.766859030 +0000
>> > Change: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.766859030 +0000
>> >  Birth: -
>> >
>> > Elsewhere in the repository, it's clear the timestamps are not consistent:
>> >
>> > $ stat Makefile
>> >   File: Makefile
>> >   Size: 8369            Blocks: 24         IO Block: 4096   regular file
>> > Device: fd07h/64775d    Inode: 33655       Links: 1
>> > Access: (0644/-rw-r--r--)  Uid: (  106/ luthier)   Gid: (  106/ luthier)
>> > Access: 2022-10-31 16:05:51.628660212 +0000
>> > Modify: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.746857963 +0000
>> > Change: 2022-10-31 16:05:17.746857963 +0000
>> >  Birth: -
>> 
>> I think you're almost certainly running into the parallel checkout,
>> which is new in that revision range. Try tweaking checkout.workers and
>> checkout.thresholdForParallelism (see "man git-config").
>
> Thanks, it will be interesting to try this and I'll report back.

FWIW I was under the impression that we'd made it the default, so unless
you opted-in it's probably not that.

>> I can't say without looking at the code/Makefile (and even then, I don't
>> have time to dig here:), but if I had to bet I'd say that your
>> dependencies have probably always been broken with these checked-in
>> files, but they happend to work out if they were checked out in sorted
>> order.
>>
>> And now with the parallel checkout they're not guaranteed to do that, as
>> some workers will "race ahead" and finish in an unpredictable order.
>
> These are very simple Makefile rules, I don't think these dependencies are 
> broken; but your theory is in good alignment with the observed behaviour.
>
> For example, the rule from the recent case above is:
>
>   %.jpeg:         %.png
>                   convert $< $(IMFLAGS) $@
>
>   %.png:          %.svg
>                   inkscape --export-type=png --export-filename=$@ $<

Grom a glance those don't seem broken to me, but I don't know how it
interacts with your built assets.

So e.g. if you are checking in your *.jpeg files those will be more
recent than either the *.png or source *.svn, so they won't be built.

This is fast getting out of scope of Git-specific advice, but you should
run "make --debug" (there's also sub-debug flags) to see if make's idea
of the dependency graph matches yours.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-01 18:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-31 19:01 Consist timestamps within a checkout/clone Mark Hills
2022-10-31 20:17 ` Andreas Schwab
2022-10-31 20:21 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-10-31 20:36   ` Taylor Blau
2022-10-31 22:31     ` Mark Hills
2022-10-31 22:42       ` rsbecker
2022-11-01 18:34       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-10-31 22:29   ` Mark Hills
2022-11-01 17:46     ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason [this message]
2022-11-02 14:16       ` Matheus Tavares
2022-11-02 14:28         ` Matheus Tavares
2022-11-01 13:55 ` Marc Branchaud
2022-11-02 14:45   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-11-03 13:46     ` Marc Branchaud
2022-11-01 14:34 ` Erik Cervin Edin
2022-11-01 15:53   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-11-03 13:02     ` Erik Cervin Edin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=221101.86bkpq4jan.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com \
    --to=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark@xwax.org \
    --cc=matheus.bernardino@usp.br \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).