Hi Barry, I'm aware of shiv, thus my "and other zip based distribution methods."
Also, you're welcome to come and meet and greet with XAR people if you want to know all the ins and outs here on campus. We're not far away + I'm always in pypa-dev + can use that Twitter thing :) Specific answers below. > On Jul 16, 2018, at 3:56 PM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > > Cooper Ry Lees wrote on 7/13/18 13:51: > >> Today Facebook Open Sourced a competitor to PEX and other zip based >> distribution methods for Python (and potentially other languages). Basically >> it's claim to fame is start up time for large modules being similar to >> regular on file system modules due to extracting on read via SquashFS >> mounted executables. For more information read our blog post: >> - >> https://code.fb.com/data-infrastructure/xars-a-more-efficient-open-source-system-for-self-contained-executables/ >> >> <https://code.fb.com/data-infrastructure/xars-a-more-efficient-open-source-system-for-self-contained-executables/> > > This is really interesting! Thanks for releasing it and announcing it. I > should mention that LinkedIn (my day job) recently released 'shiv' as a more > modern, and in our case much faster, zipapp container similar to pex. > > http://shiv.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ > > I have some quick questions about XAR: > > * How do you achieve faster hot start times with XAR over native file system? > That's a bit unexpected, although based on our shiv work, I can imagine some > things about how you start Python or lay out the code that might provide > better hot start times (e.g. fewer entries on sys.path and a fanatical > avoidance of pkg_resources). OTOH, I'd think that relying on FUSE would > impose some additional overhead over native file systems. > I usually only see similar start times to native file system, sometimes only slightly faster. Our numbers published are probably on modules to small to be super accurate for all use cases. > * Is there any practical operational or performance limits on the number of > mounted XARs you can have? E.g. what's the impact of deploying say a few > thousand XARs on any particular machine (generally, of Linux and macOS - I'm > not as concerned about Windows :) We have tiers (think of that as a collection of servers for a particular service) that have 100s mounted at times. Have not hit 1000s - But have not seen any huge problems with 100s. What do your servers do that would need 1000s of XARs running at once? Seems like that could be optimized. > > * Do you just put the XAR mountpoint's bin on everyone's $PATH or do you > symlink those bins into a standard $PATH location? Standard PATH location via RPM installs. > > Cheers, > -Barry > -- > Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/7CD3HDYFNIAFWSD4FSSTJQRNGJ7M3TDP/ -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/76QMPMCSB76KKQK6P2ZPOYIL3AB3WONI/
