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

Cache manifests not promises #7494

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 9, 2024
Merged

Cache manifests not promises #7494

merged 4 commits into from
May 9, 2024

Conversation

wraithgar
Copy link
Member

  • chore: disable progress on shellout exit tests
  • chore: disable color in config tests
  • chore: disable progress on npm pack test
  • fix: avoid caching manifests as promises

These tests assert what happens if a shellout command like exec throws unexpected errors by checking what is written to stderr. Progress also gets written to stderr but is not always deterministic due to the nature of calling it via setInterval. So this disables progress for these tests so the stderr assertions can be relied on to be the same.
The logging output was making bare string assertions fail
Originally this was in #7468:

We backed off of it while we were rebuilding pacote's packument cache.

Now that that's done we can assess this in isolation.  I think it makes
sense.  The packument is cached here, all this is awaiting is
normalization and ssri calculation.

The only place this potentially does anything is in the premature
loading of manifests in `#buildDepStep` when looking at problem edges.
We can just wait till we need them and not throw a ton of requests in
parallel before we actually need them.

Removing the premature loading in problem edges will have to be a
separate effort, as it is somehow load bearing
@wraithgar wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code owner May 9, 2024 14:05
@wraithgar wraithgar merged commit 56a27fa into latest May 9, 2024
42 checks passed
@wraithgar wraithgar deleted the gar/cache-manifest branch May 9, 2024 15:46
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request May 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants