-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 614
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
future: cache editables in memory during the current run #159
Comments
blueyed
added a commit
to blueyed/pip-tools
that referenced
this issue
May 12, 2015
This improves performance, especially for VCS editable dependencies. Fixes: jazzband#159
While this change is probably good anyway, I'd really like to cache the editables also for a certain period, e.g. 5 minutes. |
blueyed
added a commit
to blueyed/pip-tools
that referenced
this issue
Jun 17, 2015
This improves performance, especially for VCS editable dependencies, where it is also required for pip not barking out because of an existing source/build directory. Fixes: jazzband#159
blueyed
added a commit
to blueyed/pip-tools
that referenced
this issue
Jun 20, 2015
This improves performance, especially for VCS editable dependencies, where it is also required for pip not barking out because of an existing source/build directory. Fixes: jazzband#159
blueyed
added a commit
to blueyed/pip-tools
that referenced
this issue
Jun 25, 2015
This improves performance, especially for VCS editable dependencies, where it is also required for pip not barking out because of an existing source/build directory. Fixes: jazzband#159
This was implemented in PR #476 to fix a new bug introduced in 1.8.1. Closing. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
I've noticed that editable VCS dependencies get fetched multiple times during the same run, but they could and should be cached during the current run.
Apart from improving performance, this makes also sure that they do not change during the run.
IIRC I've changed that in the former future branch, before the rewrite.
I could imagine adding a
MemoryDependencyCache
, which behaves likeDependencyCache
, but would not read/write anything.What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: