git clone vs downloading zip

[elorest]

It seems that shards does a clone of the project vs just downloading the the relevant code for tag or branch. Wouldn't it be more efficient for both us and github to just download the required shard as a zip or tar.gz? curl -OL https://github.com/amberframework/amber/archive/v0.3.0.tar.gz

There were issues related to this with CocoaPods using github in this fashion a while back.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11245652

[Sija]

Wouldn't it be more efficient for both us and github to just download the required shard as a zip or tar.gz? curl -OL https://github.com/amberframework/amber/archive/v0.3.0.tar.gz

according to CocoaPods/CocoaPods#4989 (comment) and CocoaPods/CocoaPods#4989 (comment) doing git clone (without --shallow) is pretty efficient, at least in terms of CPU.

There were issues related to this with CocoaPods using github in this fashion a while back.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11245652

FYI, mentioned issue has been resolved by removing --shallow from git clone performed by CocoaPods client along with preflight checks for updates and partitioning 16k directory (see CocoaPods/CocoaPods#4989 (comment)).

[elorest]

Thanks for the response. If the solution for github load is to remove --shallow, then we end up having to download a lot of data for large or old repos with lots of history. This can be a problem for people with poor internet connections. Is cloning the repo without --shallow more efficient than downloading branch/tag archives for github? Because it definitely takes longer for the client.

[RX14]

Cocoapods was special because it cloned a single repository every single time. Shards doesn't do that, every single shard is in its own repository.

We'd need to put in special logic to handle github if we wanted to do this, and currently we don't have that. We rely on a local git heck out and actually perform full git operations on the repo such as listing tags and checking out multiple tags. For this reason we need a full clone unless we also use the github api to replace this. So this is neither simple or neccesary I think.

[ysbaddaden]

We could specialise the GitHub resolver, but we should verify that it's actually faster. Having to request the Git server for tags, for each shard.yml per Git refs, ... may end up being slower than cloning the repository. Not even talking of "duplicating" implementation logic to accommodate a specific Git service.

If I remember correctly, Bower doesnt specialise for GitHub but checks for a "smart" Git server and clones at --depth 1 if possible —then I don't know how it accesses tags, etc.

Maybe install could download a zip or a Git archive for the specified refs, to speed up repeated installs (e.g. on CI), but update will probably continue to do a full clone.

[ysbaddaden]

Looking deeper into the CocoaPods issue, there are a couple things we could do to improve the situation:

1. Have a per-user cache for cloned repositories, instead of a per-project (e.g. ~/.cache/shards);
2. Use https://developer.github.com/changes/2016-02-24-commit-reference-sha-api/ to avoid long and slow git fetches;
3. Have an install --download command to download tarballs instead of cloning (may avoid some lockfile checks, but that should ok);

[RX14]

I don't think we should overcomplicate shards with too much optimizations. I'd go for a central repository index first in $XDG_CACHE_HOME/shards (which we should only have to update when we do shards update, since otherwise we have a sha or tag in the cache (or a cache miss)).

(2) is still pretty easy, just a simple API call, but it is github-specific. So i'd leave that off for now. (3) I don't think we should ever implement unless github communicates with us that we're causing excessive load.

[ysbaddaden]

Point 2. is a mere method overload to call super or not. I expect the HTTP call to be faster than a Git fetch. Let's be honest: 99% of shards are hosted on GitHub and will benefit from it, so we should implement it.

[RX14]

Surely you need to match the git url to github?

[ysbaddaden]

No I mean an overload in https://github.com/crystal-lang/shards/blob/master/src/resolvers/github.cr

[RX14]

Seems slightly unexpected that it'd work for the github: user/repo syntax and not the git syntax. In my eyes the github syntax would simply be an alias and not have any different behaviour.

[marksiemers]

I wanted to add an example of where this would be extremely helpful - mostly if any shard creator or maintainer accidentally forgets to gitignore something early in the project, then the git clone is stuck with that forever (unless git history is re-written or deleted).

One example shard, doing a git clone was downloading 30+ MB
The same shard, if just one release were downloaded it is between 2KB - 4KB

Even with shard caching, if a test suite involves doing a shards build - I don't think there will ever be a cache hit.

EDIT : I realized that with a global cache, there will be cache hits. With containers and when running tests on travis, those containers may have an empty global cache to start.

[ysbaddaden]

Global cache is now available on the master branch, and should be alongside crystal's cache. You may customize it with SHARDS_CACHE_PATH, for example you may return to the previous behavior by exporting SHARDS_CACHE_PATH=.shards

[elorest]

Global Cache should help a lot.

One issue for people using github is that every branch/fork/pr that's ever existed remains in github repo's and can't be deleted or modified.
! [remote rejected] refs/pull/1/merge -> refs/pull/1/merge (deny updating a hidden ref)

This means that when using clone --mirror the repo sized can't be reduced. Is there a reason that shards needs to use git clone --mirror instead of just git clone?

[ysbaddaden]

Shards needs all refs, because versions are tags and we can install any refs (branch, tag, commit). But maybe my understanding is wrong and --bare would be enough?

[jhass]

Worst case it could just try to fetch the specified ref and see if that works, no?

[elorest]

Even with a simple clone should be sufficient to switch to tags. @jhass your suggestion sounds good to me.

[faustinoaq]

@ysbaddaden Thanks you so much for local cache feature! 🎉

Now I can install amber project dependencies faster:

before: ../shards/bin/shards  3.31s user 1.06s system 5% cpu 1:27.02 total
after: ../shards/bin/shards  1.63s user 0.31s system 8% cpu 23.473 total

We put a lot effort trying to reduce amber repo size, but --mirror flag doesn't help:

git clone --mirror [email protected]:amberframework/amber.git
Cloning into bare repository 'amber.git'...
Enter passphrase for key '/home/main/.ssh/id_rsa': 
remote: Counting objects: 12328, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (481/481), done.
remote: Total 12328 (delta 402), reused 774 (delta 375), pack-reused 11471
Receiving objects: 100% (12328/12328), 7.78 MiB | 555.00 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (6904/6904), done.

I think we can use --bare instead, WDYT?

git clone --bare [email protected]:amberframework/amber.git  
Cloning into bare repository 'amber.git'...
Enter passphrase for key '/home/main/.ssh/id_rsa': 
Enter passphrase for key '/home/main/.ssh/id_rsa': 
remote: Counting objects: 6657, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (482/482), done.
remote: Total 6657 (delta 401), reused 763 (delta 377), pack-reused 5797
Receiving objects: 100% (6657/6657), 970.82 KiB | 203.00 KiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (3661/3661), done.

[eliasjpr]

Maybe this could be as simple as adding a flag like shards install --base and it will default to --mirror

[faustinoaq]

@ysbaddaden Do you think we can add an optional --bare flag?, something like shards install --bare

[elorest]

If --bare works is there any reason to use mirror? git clone --mirror is a lot larger than git clone --bare

[ysbaddaden]

Done in 3a64a76. Tests are passing in local. Please try, but make sure to drop .shards or ~/.cache/shards beforehand.

[faustinoaq]

@ysbaddaden I tested master and works fine, I tried installing different shards versions and all is working ok.

Also shards cache is lightweight and faster now. By example, instaling ambrockets dependencies::

Before:

$ rm -rf ~/.cache/shards lib shard.lock
$ time shards install
...
3.65s user 1.03s system 6% cpu 1:07.74 total
$ du -h -d 0 ~/.cache/shards
18M     /home/main/.cache/shards
$ du -h -d 1 .
48K     ./config
320K    ./.git
4.0K    ./bin
7.0M    ./lib
8.0K    ./spec
60K     ./public
116K    ./src
7.8M    .

After: (master)

$ rm -rf ~/.cache/shards lib shard.lock
$ time shards install
...
2.60s user 0.81s system 11% cpu 29.149 total
$ du -h -d 0 ~/.cache/shards
11M     /home/main/.cache/shards
$ du -h -d 1 .
48K     ./config
320K    ./.git
4.0K    ./bin
7.0M    ./lib
8.0K    ./spec
60K     ./public
116K    ./src
7.8M    .

[vtambourine]

Another use case for ability to download package instead of cloning shard repo is to support fast containers, such as Alpine Linux containers.
In my case, I'm using alpine image as a base image for containerizing my Crystal app. It doesn't have git installed by default, and adding git package only for installing shards seems quite excessive. I would rather have an option to specify release packages I need to build in my container. Something like:

dependencies:
  dotenv:
    package: https://github.com/petoem/envy/archive/v0.1.0.tar.gz

[luislavena]

@vtambourine I know the following comments does not provide a solution to your request, but you can take advantage of multiple FROM layers in Dockerfiles, allowing you to have the compiler, build your program and then only take the necessary binaries.

Something similar to what Brian posted here:

https://manas.tech/blog/2017/04/03/shipping-crystal-apps-in-a-small-docker-image.html

And the repository:

https://github.com/bcardiff/miniserver

Hope that helps.

Cheers.

[vtambourine]

Thank you, @luislavena, that is really helpful! However, I really think Apline builds should also be quite useful.

[ysbaddaden]

Closing. Both --bare and a global cache have been implemented (in master).