| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ci: namespace ccache by PostgreSQL major version |
| Date: | 2026-07-17 15:27:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+mv3NQLf2=2SqwZQi6sEx5DqqsYde03gcS+dhtojBtibw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 17, 2026 at 6:06 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> That's how it works. We restore the cache for master and for the current
> branch. We save the cache, after pruning it, for the current branch iff the
> hit rate was < 80%.
>
> It'd be nice if we could restore the cache for the "base branch" of a branch,
> instead of master, but that's not currently possible in GHA, from what I can
> tell. Only caches on the default branch are accessible to other branches.
Quick tangent: is there a reason we put the refname into the cache
key? It seems like some of the logic there would happen by default if
we used the same cache prefix for all branches, since I thought GitHub
would perform the fallback-to-default-branch for us.
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2026-07-17 15:27:52 | Re: ci: namespace ccache by PostgreSQL major version |
| Previous Message | Paul Kim | 2026-07-17 15:14:37 | [PATCH v1] amcheck: Allow interrupting the child-level rightlink walk |