On Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 02:57:42 UTC, David Nadlinger
wrote:
On Wednesday, 13 December 2017 at 01:14:26 UTC, Seb wrote:
Also the storage on the machine is limited and we can't drop
an unlimited amount of Docker images there.
Shouldn't the overhead from that be fairly manageable? After
all, the last layer would only be as large as a single DMD/LDC
installation. Surely you would have at least a few gigabytes
spare on the server?
— David
Yes, the docker images aren't too big:
https://hub.docker.com/r/dlangtour/core-exec/tags
FYI for the "import a dub library" feature, we compile a couple
of important dub packages and bundle them within the docker
image. It's a lot faster this way and allowed to ignore the
issues of a common, shared dub package cache folder (parallel
writes, growing size, prevent "delete all", ...) for now.
Anyhow you are right, spare storage isn't a huge concern, but
there isn't much free storage either as it's a rather small
instance (I don't even know where the machine is hosted).
As mentioned before, no one has mentioned a use case for which he
would need an old, ugly compiler on run.dlang.io.
A bit of history: the app emerged from the DLang-Tour backend,
where small examples can be executed and for those you can't even
choose the compiler. After several problems and outages with
DPaste, we added it as a backend to the runnable examples on
dlang.org, for which again, you can't choice the compiler.
(To be technically correct, on the prerelease pages dmd-nightly
is automatically selected.)
It's interesting to see that no one complained about gdc not
being there - I thought that this would be the first comment.
