fscache | Streaming File Cache for # golang | Caching library

 by   djherbis Go Version: v0.11 License: MIT

kandi X-RAY | fscache Summary

kandi X-RAY | fscache Summary

fscache is a Go library typically used in Server, Caching applications. fscache has no bugs, it has no vulnerabilities, it has a Permissive License and it has low support. You can download it from GitHub.

Streaming File Cache for #golang
Support
    Quality
      Security
        License
          Reuse

            kandi-support Support

              fscache has a low active ecosystem.
              It has 102 star(s) with 30 fork(s). There are 11 watchers for this library.
              OutlinedDot
              It had no major release in the last 12 months.
              There are 3 open issues and 7 have been closed. On average issues are closed in 3 days. There are no pull requests.
              It has a neutral sentiment in the developer community.
              The latest version of fscache is v0.11

            kandi-Quality Quality

              fscache has 0 bugs and 0 code smells.

            kandi-Security Security

              fscache has no vulnerabilities reported, and its dependent libraries have no vulnerabilities reported.
              fscache code analysis shows 0 unresolved vulnerabilities.
              There are 0 security hotspots that need review.

            kandi-License License

              fscache is licensed under the MIT License. This license is Permissive.
              Permissive licenses have the least restrictions, and you can use them in most projects.

            kandi-Reuse Reuse

              fscache releases are available to install and integrate.
              Installation instructions are not available. Examples and code snippets are available.
              It has 1773 lines of code, 143 functions and 14 files.
              It has medium code complexity. Code complexity directly impacts maintainability of the code.

            Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA

            kandi has reviewed fscache and discovered the below as its top functions. This is intended to give you an instant insight into fscache implemented functionality, and help decide if they suit your requirements.
            • Handler returns an http . Handler from the cache
            • NewCacheWithHaunter returns a new FSCache with the given haunter .
            • New creates a new FSCache .
            • NewFs creates a new standard filesystem for the given directory .
            • B64OrMD5HashEncodeKeyEncodeKey returns the hash of a key .
            • NewDistributor returns a Distributor for the given caches .
            • multiWC returns an io . WriteCloser that accepts multiple writers .
            • trb64 returns base64 encoded string
            • NewLRUHaunter returns a new LRUHaunter .
            • NewCache creates a FSCache based on a file system .
            Get all kandi verified functions for this library.

            fscache Key Features

            No Key Features are available at this moment for fscache.

            fscache Examples and Code Snippets

            No Code Snippets are available at this moment for fscache.

            Community Discussions

            QUESTION

            /bin/sh^M: bad interpreter: No such file or directory error caused by different GIT env configs overriding each other?
            Asked 2022-Apr-04 at 07:05

            A build script I wrote is failing on a ci/cd pipeline (that runs in linux) because somehow the build.sh script got converted/save in CRLF format (based on what i gather online), leading to this error:

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2021-Oct-02 at 21:17

            Here are a few simple rules, although some of them are opinions:

            • core.eol is not needed; don't bother with it.
            • core.autocrlf should always be false.
            • If you have naïve Windows users who will edit *.sh files on a Windows system and thereby insert CRLF line endings into them, use .gitattributes to correct this.

            In the .gitattributes file, list the .sh files in question, or *.sh, along with the directives text eol=lf. List any other files that need special consideration too, while you're at it: *.jpg can have a binary directive, if you have JPG images in the repository; *.bat can be marked text eol=crlf; and so on.

            This won't fix your existing problem; to do that, clone the repository, check out the bad commit at the tip of the current branch, modify the .sh file(s) to replace the existing CRLF line endings with LF-only line endings, and add and commit these files. (You can do this in the same commit in which you create the .gitattributes file.) If you have a reasonably modern Git, creating the .gitattributes file and then running git add --renormalize build.sh is supposed to do all of that (except the "create a new commit" step of course) in one fell swoop (or swell foop, if you're fond of Spoonerisms).

            What's going on here?

            Line-ending-fiddling in Git is an endless source of confusion. Part of the problem stems from the fact that people attempt to observe what's happening by inspecting the files in their working tree. That's akin to trying to figure out why the icemaker in your freezer isn't working by taking the trays out and putting them under extremely hot and bright lights, so that the plastic trays melt. If you do this, you are:

            • looking in the wrong place, and
            • using a tool that destroys the very information you might be looking for in the first place.

            That is, the problem is elsewhere, and by the time you get around to looking for it, it's long gone.

            To understand what's going on, and hence how and why anything that fixes the problem actually fixes the problem, you must first learn the Three Places Of Git where files can be found:

            • Files are stored, permanently1 and immutably, inside commits, in a special, read-only, Git-only, compressed and de-duplicated form. Each commit acts as an archive—kind of like a tar or zip archive—of every file as of the state that file had at the time you committed it.

              Because of the special properties of these files, they literally cannot be used by your computer, except by Git itself. They must therefore be extracted, like un-archiving an archive with tar -x or unzip.

            • Files are stored in a usable form, as everyday files, in your working tree. This is where the extracted (unzipped, or whatever) files wind up. These files are not actually in Git at all. They are there for you to use as inputs and/or outputs, and your working tree is just an ordinary set of folders (or directories, whichever term you prefer) and files, stored in the way that is ordinary for your particular computer.2

            That covers two places: so where is this "third place" I talk about? This is what Git calls, variously, the index, or the staging area, or—rarely these days—the cache. Git's index holds a third "copy" of every file. I put the word "copy" in quotes here because what's in the index is actually a sort of reference, using the de-duplication trick.

            Initially, when you first use git checkout or git switch to extract a particular commit from a repository you've just cloned, what Git does is:

            • "copy" each file into its own index: this "copy" is in the read-only Git-only compressed-and-de-duplicated form; then
            • expand the file into usable form and put that into your working tree.

            Note that before this step, Git's index was empty: it had no files in it at all. Now Git's index has every file from the current commit. These take no space, because they're de-duplicated and—having come out of a commit—they're all already in the repository so they are duplicates and therefore these copies use no space to hold the data.3

            So: what's the point of this index / staging-area / cache? Well, one point is that it makes Git go fast. Another is that it lets you partially stage files (though I won't cover what that means here). But in fact, it's not strictly necessary: other version control systems get away without having one. It's just that Git not only has it, Git forces you to use it. So you need to know about it, if only to know that it places itself between you and your files—in your working tree—and the commits in the repository.

            By omitting a few details that eventually matter, but not yet, we can describe the index pretty well as your proposed next commit. That is, the index holds each file that will go into the next commit. These files are in Git's own format—compressed and de-duplicated—but, unlike the files inside a commit, you can replace them. You can't modify them (they're in the read-only format, and pre-de-duplicated), but you can run git add.

            The git add command reads the working tree copy of some file. This working tree copy is the version you see and work with. If you've changed it, git add reads the changed version.4 The add command compresses this data down into Git's special internal format and checks to see if it's a duplicate. If it is a duplicate, Git throws out its compression result and re-uses the existing data, updating the index with the re-used file. If it's not a duplicate, Git saves the compressed and de-duplicated (but first time now) file data and updates the index with that.

            Either way, what's in the index now is the updated file. So the index now holds your proposed next commit. It held your proposed next commit before the git add too, but now your proposed next commit is updated. This tells us what the index is for from our point of view: The index holds your proposed next commit. You do not commit what is in your working tree. Instead, you commit what is in Git's index. This is why you need to know about the index: it's how Git makes new commits.

            1The commits themselves are only permanent until you or Git remove them, but in a lot of cases that's "never". It's actually kind of hard to get rid of a Git commit, for many reasons. A file's data as stored in a commit, de-duplicated, remains in the repository until every commit that holds that file is removed, though.

            2The actual file storage format inside computers is itself amazingly complicated and varied. Some systems do case-preserving but case-folding in file names, for instance, so that README.md and ReadMe.md are "the same file", while others say that these are two different files. Git holds the latter opinion, and when the commit archive holds both a README.md and a ReadMe.md, and you extract that commit to your working tree, one of those files goes missing from your working tree, since it's physically incapable of holding both (because they have the "same name" as far as your computer is concerned). Because Git's archived files are in a special Git-only format, this is not a problem for Git itself. But it can be a huge headache for you.

            3The other properties stored in the index—such as the cache aspect, which helps Git go fast—do take a bit of space. The average tends to somewhere close to 100 bytes per file, so unless you have a million files (which then needs ~100 MB of index), this is utterly trivial in modern systems where a chip the size of your fingernail provides 256 GB of storage.

            4If you haven't changed it, git add tries to skip reading it, to make Git go fast. This will cause us problems in a moment. So sometimes you may find it useful to trick Git into thinking you've changed it. You can do this by rewriting the file in place, or using the touch command if you have that, for instance. The --renormalize flag to git add is supposed to fix this as well, but I have seen people say it doesn't.

            How this relates to line endings

            Let's review quickly now:

            • Every commit contains files-as-a-snapshot, in a frozen (read-only), compressed, de-duplicated format. Nothing, not even Git itself, can ever change any part of any commit.

            • Git makes new commits from whatever is in Git's index. Git fills in the index from a commit when you check out the commit, and builds the new commit from whatever is in its index at the time you run git commit.

            • Your working tree lets you see what came out of a commit: the files come out of the commit, go into Git's index, and then get copied and expanded to become ordinary files in your working tree. Your working tree lets you control what goes into a new commit: you run git add and the data get compressed, de-duplicated, and generally Git-ified and put into the index, ready to be committed.

            Note that there are steps here where Git does something very easy for Git: copying a commit into the index doesn't change any of the files at all, as they're still in the special read-only, Git-only format. Making a new commit doesn't change any of the files at all: they just get packaged up into a (read-only) commit, from the (replaceable but still read-only) "copies" in the index. But there are two steps where Git does something much harder:

            • As a file gets copied out of the index to your working tree, it gets expanded and transformed. Git has to change from compressed bytes to uncompressed bytes. This is an ideal time to change LF-only to CRLF and this is when Git will do that, if Git does it at all.

            • As a file gets copied from the working tree to be compressed and Git-ified and checked if it's a duplicate, Git has to change from uncompressed bytes to compressed ones. This is an ideal time to change CRLF to LF-only and this is when Git will do that, if Git does it at all.

            So it's copies in and out of the index where Git does CRLF line ending modification. Moreover, the "index -> working tree" step—which happens during git checkout, for instance—can only add CRs. It can't remove them. The "working tree -> index" step—which happens during git add, for instance—can only remove CRs, not add them.

            This in turn means that, if you choose to start doing line ending transformation, the committed files inside the repository will eventually end up with LF-only line endings, over time. If some committed files have CRLF line endings now, they will, in those commits, have those endings forever, because no existing commit can be changed.

            Optimizations that get in the way

            Now we get to some of the optimizations:

            • When checking out a commit, Git tries hard not to touch the working tree if possible. This is slow! Let's not do it if we don't have to.

            • When using git add, Git tries hard not to touch the index if possible. It's too slow!

            Suppose you check out some commit, say, deadbeef. It has 5923 files in it. Those files get "copied" into the index, which is really fast because these aren't real copies. But were there files in the index before? Say you had commit dadc0ffee out just before you switched to deadbeef. That commit had put 5752 files in the index, and then all you did was look at the working tree copies.

            Obviously these files aren't all the same, but what if 5519 of the files were the same, leaving only 233 files to change and 171 new files to create. For whatever reason, there are no files in dadc0ffee that aren't in deadbeef, there are only new files. Or maybe one file does go away and Git will have to remove that one from the working tree and create 172 files. But either way, Git only needs to mess with 404 or 405 files in the working tree, not more than 5500. That's going to run about ten times faster.

            So, Git does that. If Git can, it doesn't touch files. It assumes that if file path/to/file.ext in the index in commit dadc0ffee has the same raw hash ID as file path/to/file.ext in the index in commit deadbeef, it does not have to do anything to the working tree copy.

            This assumption breaks down in the presence of CRLF line ending trickiness. If Git is supposed to do LF to CRLF modifications on the way out, but didn't for dadc0ffee, Git may skip doing it for deadbeef too.

            What this means is that whenever you change the CRLF line endings settings, you can end up with "wrong" line endings in your working tree. You can get around this by removing the working tree copy and then checking out the file again (with git restore or git reset --hard, for instance, though remember that git reset --hard loses uncommitted work!).

            Meanwhile, if you run git add on some file, and Git thinks that the cached index copy is up to date—because you haven't edited the working tree copy, for instance—Git will silently do nothing at all. But if the working tree copy has CRLF line endings, and the index (and hence future commit) copy shouldn't, this is wrong. Using git add --renormalize is supposed to get around it, or you can "touch" the file so that Git sees a newer working-tree time stamp and will redo the copy. Or, you can even run git rm --cached on the file, and then git add really does have to copy it, because there's no longer a copy of that file in the index at all.

            Summary: the reason for the "simple rules" above

            Using a .gitattributes file entry gives Git the most chance to get things right: Git can tell if the .gitattributes file entry affects some particular file. That gives Git the opportunity to do better cache checking, for instance. (Git currently doesn't use this opportunity properly, I think, but at least it offers the possibility.)

            When you do use .gitattributes entries, they tell Git multiple things:

            • this file definitely is or isn't text: do, or don't, mess with it;
            • if you are going to mess with line endings, here's what to do.

            This lets you say that *.bat files need to be CRLF-ended in the working tree, even on a Linux system, and *.sh files need to be LF-ended in the working tree, even on a Windows system.

            You get as much control as Git is willing to give you:

            • You get the ability to turn CRLF in the working tree into LF-only in the index and hence in future commits.
            • You get the ability to turn LF-only in committed copies of files into CRLF in the working tree, on future extractions of this commit.

            The one thing you lose is the easy and global effect of core.eol and core.autocrlf: these affect existing commits, and tell Git to guess whether each file is text. As long as Git guesses right, that tends to work sort-of-OK. It's when Git guesses wrong that things go really bad. But because these settings affect every file extraction (index-to-work-tree) and every git add (work-tree-to-index) that actually happens, and it's hard to know which ones happen, it's very hard to see what's going on.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69416842

            QUESTION

            Git shows unmodified files as modified
            Asked 2022-Mar-18 at 14:37
            Setup
            • git version 2.32.0.windows.1
            • TortoiseGit 2.13.0.1
            • git config -l
            • Diff Tool: BeyondCompare
            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2022-Mar-18 at 14:37

            As @torek stated out in the comments: the .gitattribute text settings caused the problem. We committed those modified files and everything went well after that.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71494869

            QUESTION

            Laravel sail bash\r in docker
            Asked 2022-Feb-16 at 20:38

            I'm trying to docker up a laravel application with laravel sail, but I get the following error for the sail container:

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2022-Feb-16 at 20:38

            Run the dos2unix command which changed many project files and it worked there.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71038357

            QUESTION

            Git lists files as changed but there are no changes
            Asked 2021-Sep-27 at 22:34

            This is the umpteenth version of the extremely basic question "why the heck is Git telling me that files changed but diff shows no changes?". Similar questions have been posted here and here but none of those answers help.

            My scenario is as follows:

            I added a .gitattributes file to an existing Git repo with several already existing commits in it. The content of the .gitattributes file looks as follows:

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2021-Sep-27 at 22:34

            There are multiple possibilities here, but the most common by far has to do with these CRLF line endings. It's complicated, and to really get it, we need some background first.

            From a high level point of view, Git basically has two options:

            • Don't mess with line endings ever.
            • Do mess with line endings.

            The first one is really simple, and is the default on all Unix-like systems. It's probably the default on Windows too, but I don't use Windows, so I'd have to defer to anyone else who says otherwise. In this setup, if you create a file and store, in that file, the byte-sequence:

            h e l l o CTRL-M CTRL-J w o r l d CTRL-M CTRL-J

            and then git add the file and run git commit, Git will store, in the repository, a new commit in which that file contains those 14 bytes. The blob hash ID will be:

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69349158

            QUESTION

            git config for specific local repository did not work
            Asked 2021-Mar-15 at 03:12

            My development environment:

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2021-Jan-19 at 08:08

            A local config will overwrite any global configuration.
            Check yours with:

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65787425

            QUESTION

            VS2019 : Error encountered while pushing to the remote repository: Git failed with a fatal error. unable to access
            Asked 2020-Dec-10 at 09:38

            Today my visual studio 2019 team explorer github push get below error.
            I have no idea how to fix this error.

            error message :

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2020-Aug-21 at 00:13

            follow this page fatal: unable to access curl-ca-bundle.crt · Issue #4836 · desktop/desktop

            1. I found curl-ca-bundle.crt at C:\Program Files (x86)\Git\bin\curl-ca-bundle.crt
            2. copy it to C:\program files (x86)\microsoft visual studio\2019\community\common7\ide\commonextensions\microsoft\teamfoundation\team explorer\Git\mingw32\bin\curl-ca-bundle.crt
            3. try to push in vs2019 and it's work.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63501083

            QUESTION

            .gitattributes not respected on most windows OS
            Asked 2020-Oct-20 at 23:54

            So I've tried to introduce a .gitattributes file to my projects repos but I've run into an issue where the file is not respected among some of my peers Windows 10 machines. I've tried looking at Git pull on Windows (git smc client) doesn't respect .gitattributes's eol=lf and many other posts to no avail as it doesn't fit the experience I am seeing. I would expect given this .gitattributes file that all text would stay as LF but it is not. The windows OS is actively converting the files at git add (which have all undergone git add --renormalize .) to CRLF. The exact warning is: warning: LF will be replaced by CRLF in Callflows/ors_PostCreateOrsIssue.callflow. The file will have its original line endings in your working directory.

            To confound it more, a couple of my peers' windows OS performs as expected where the LF and the .gitattributes is respected.

            Gitattributes:

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2020-Oct-20 at 23:54

            You've misconfigured your .gitattributes file. The attribute is eol=lf, not eol=LF. This option is case sensitive, like most Git options, and by specifying LF this attribute is left unset. Since it's unset and your version of Git is configured with core.autocrlf=true, your files are checked out as CRLF.

            If you fix that, things should work correctly.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64453192

            QUESTION

            Git doesn't detect file changes on Windows 10
            Asked 2020-Sep-26 at 16:22

            I am aware this is not a new question, but I had tried many suggested methods from previous posts without any luck, except with this command.

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2020-Sep-26 at 15:32

            Someone from https://groups.google.com/g/git-for-windows had suggested me to remove core.ignoreStat in the gitconfig

            Now my git is working normally again. Thanks!

            From the git documentation:

            core.ignoreStat

            If true, Git will avoid using lstat() calls to detect if files have changed by setting the "assume-unchanged" bit for those tracked files which it has updated identically in both the index and working tree.

            When files are modified outside of Git, the user will need to stage the modified files explicitly (e.g. see Examples section in git-update-index[1]). Git will not normally detect changes to those files.

            This is useful on systems where lstat() calls are very slow, such as CIFS/Microsoft Windows.

            False by default.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/64037860

            QUESTION

            Git pull creates merge by the 'recursive' strategy
            Asked 2020-Aug-09 at 19:33

            Foreword after finding solution: "side-effect" of default git pull behavior have been observed, because I have a two sources of changes on master branch - me and GitLab. Similar situation could arise if two persons would work on the same branch.

            I have an issue with git and GitLab. My workflow is:

            1. GitLab: Create Merge Request with branch issue-branch to the issue.
            2. git pull on local repository.
            3. git checkout issue-branch
            4. Changes on the branch.
            5. git push after all.
            6. GitLab: accept MR with delete branch.
            7. git status - no changes.
            8. git checkout master then git pull.

            Expected result: source code pulled and ready to next work.

            Actual result: git creates new, local merge. I see output like this:

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2020-Aug-09 at 18:20

            git pull --ff solves issue, but I don't know why git doesn't detect that ff should be used.

            For now I will end with configuration git config --global pull.ff only to avoid such issue.

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63329063

            QUESTION

            unable to access 'https://github.com/user name/projectName.git/': SSL certificate problem: self signed certificate in certificate chain
            Asked 2020-Aug-04 at 07:12

            I'm trying to clone a project from Github but I can't clone it because I have this error unable to access : SSL certificate problem: self signed certificate in certificate chain I have an access from my network and I have the certifications .

            Is there any problem in my Android Studio or in my network because I have searched for this many times and I didn't find yet the solution .

            Edit Here are my Git configuration value after running this command git config -l --show-origin

            ...

            ANSWER

            Answered 2020-Aug-04 at 07:12

            I found the solution in this answer on Github

            Click here to see the perfect answer

            Source https://stackoverflow.com/questions/63227550

            Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network

            Vulnerabilities

            No vulnerabilities reported

            Install fscache

            You can download it from GitHub.

            Support

            For any new features, suggestions and bugs create an issue on GitHub. If you have any questions check and ask questions on community page Stack Overflow .
            Find more information at:

            Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items

            Find more libraries

            Stay Updated

            Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps

            Agree to Sign up and Terms & Conditions

            Share this Page

            share link

            Explore Related Topics

            Consider Popular Caching Libraries

            caffeine

            by ben-manes

            groupcache

            by golang

            bigcache

            by allegro

            DiskLruCache

            by JakeWharton

            HanekeSwift

            by Haneke

            Try Top Libraries by djherbis

            buffer

            by djherbisGo

            nio

            by djherbisGo

            times

            by djherbisGo

            stow

            by djherbisGo

            stream

            by djherbisGo