Speed up importing trees from special remotes somewhat by avoiding
redundant writes to sqlite database.
Before, import would write to both the git-annex branch and also to the
sqlite database. But then the next time it was run, needsUpdateFromLog
would see the branch had changed, so run updateFromLog, which would make
the same writes to the sqlite database a second time.
Now import writes only to the git-annex branch. The next time it's run,
needsUpdateFromLog sees that the branch has changed and so calls
updateFromLog, which updates the sqlite database.
Why defer the write to the sqlite database like this? It seems that it
could write to the database as it goes, and at the end call
recordAnnexBranchTree to indicate that the information in the git-annex
branch has all been written to the cidsdb. That would avoid the second
import doing extra work.
But, there could be other processes running at the same time, and one of
them may update the git-annex branch, eg merging a remote git-annex branch
into it. Any cids logs on that merged git-annex branch would not be
reflected in the cidsdb yet. If the import then called
recordAnnexBranchTree, the cidsdb would never get updated with that merged
information.
I don't think there's a good way to prevent, or to detect that situation.
So, it can't call recordAnnexBranchTree at the end. So it might as well
wait until the next run and do updateFromLog then. It could instead do
updateFromLog at the end, but it's going to check needsUpdateFromLog
at the beginning anyway.
Note that the database writes were queued, so there is already a cidmap
that is used to remember changes that the current process has made.
So, omitting database writes can't change the behavior of the current
process.
Also note that thirdpartypopulatedimport uses recordcidkeyindb, which
reflects what it already did. That code path does not use the cidmap,
but does not need to query it either. It might be possible to make that
code path also only update the git-annex branch and not the db, but I
haven't checked.
Sponsored-by: Noam Kremen on Patreon
I noticed git-annex was using a lot of CPU when downloading from youtube,
and was not displaying progress. Turns out that yt-dlp (and I think also
youtube-dl) sometimes only knows an estimated size, not the actual size,
and displays the progress output slightly differently for that. That broke
the parser. And, the parser was feeding chunks that failed to parse back
as a remainder, which caused it to try to re-parse the entire output each
time, so it got slower and slower.
Using --progress-template like this should avoid parsing problems as well
as future proof against output changes. But it will work with only yt-dlp.
So, this seemed like the right time to deprecate youtube-dl, and default
to yt-dlp when available.
git-annex will still use youtube-dl if that's all that's available.
However, since the progress parser for youtube-dl was buggy, and I don't
want to maintain two different progress parsers (especially since
youtube-dl is no longer in debian unstable having been replaced by
yt-dlp), made git-annex no longer try to parse youtube-dl's progress.
Also, updated docs for yt-dlp being default. It did not seem worth
renaming annex.youtube-dl-options and annex.youtube-dl-command.
Note that yt-dlp does not seem to document the fields available in the
progress template. I found them by reading the source and looking at
the templates it uses internally. Also note that the use of "i" (rather
than "s") in progressTemplate makes it display floats rounded to integers;
particularly the estimated total size can be a float. That also does not
seem to be documented but I assume is a python thing?
Sponsored-by: Joshua Antonishen on Patreon
Consistency with sync and internal consistency is more important than
consistency with the assistant, which is not itself consistent about
what it does when run in a subdirectory.
Note that with -C, it will still commit staged changes to files outside
the directory. Like sync does. Presumably if the user is manually
staging things, then running this command, they intend to build up a
commit.
Sponsored-by: unqueued on Patreon
The obvious way to fix this would be to adapt lines to split on null.
However, it's actually nontrivial to rewrite lines. In particular it has a
weird implementation to avoid a space leak. See:
https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/-/issues/4334
Also, while that is a small amount of code, it's covered by a rather
complex copyright and I'd have to include that copyright in git-annex.
So, I opted to filter out the trailing empty string instead.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
assist: New command, which is the same as git-annex sync but with
new files added and content transferred by default.
(Also this fixes another reversion in git-annex sync,
--commit --no-commit, and --message were not enabled, oops.)
See added comment for why git-annex assist does commit staged
changes elsewhere in the work tree, but only adds files under
the cwd.
Note that it does not support --no-commit, --no-push, --no-pull
like sync does. My thinking is, why should it? If you want that
level of control, use git commit, git annex push, git annex pull.
Sync only got those options because pull and push were not split
out.
Sponsored-by: k0ld on Patreon
When used without --content or --no-content, warn about the upcoming
transition, and suggest using one of the options, or setting
annex.synccontent.
Sponsored-by: Brett Eisenberg on Patreon
This option is not specific to sync, so it seemed it should be in either
pull or push as well as sync. Since it does modify the remote, it seems
better to have it in push; the modification of the local repo pulls in
the direction of pull, but not hard enough.
Maybe it would be better to have it in both?
Sponsored-by: Luke Shumaker on Patreon
I anticipate that if sync is transitioned to syncing content by default,
people will want a short option. And in repositories where
annex.synccontent = true, they already would. And pull and push sync
content by default, so a short option is useful with them too.
Mnemonic: -g makes only git data be synced
Also, -a makes only annex data be synced.
Would have preferred -c, which would complement -C, but it
was already taken to set git configs.
Sponsored-by: Noam Kremen on Patreon
Split out two new commands, git-annex pull and git-annex push. Those plus a
git commit are equivilant to git-annex sync.
In a sense, git-annex sync conflates 3 things, and it would have been
better to have push and pull from the beginning and not sync. Although
note that git-annex sync --content is faster than a pull followed by a
push, because it only has to walk the tree once, look at preferred
content once, etc. So there is some value in git-annex sync in speed, as
well as user convenience.
And it would be hard to split out pull and push from sync, as far as the
implementaton goes. The implementation inside sync was easy, just adjust
SyncOptions so it does the right thing.
Note that the new commands default to syncing content, unless
annex.synccontent is explicitly set to false. I'd like sync to also do
that, but that's a hard transition to make. As a start to that
transition, I added a note to git-annex-sync.mdwn that it may start to
do so in a future version of git-annex. But a real transition would
necessarily involve displaying warnings when sync is used without
--content, and time.
Sponsored-by: Kevin Mueller on Patreon
