Assigned
Status Update
Comments
su...@google.com <su...@google.com>
ke...@leveltenenergy.com <ke...@leveltenenergy.com> #2
I have forwarded this request to the engineering team. We will update this issue with any progress updates and a resolution.
Best Regards,
Josh Moyer
Google Cloud Platform Support
Best Regards,
Josh Moyer
Google Cloud Platform Support
su...@google.com <su...@google.com> #3
This is not only useful for IP addresses, but also for many other resources. I understand that names are currently used as identifiers, so this request is probably not trivial to implement. Maybe distinguishing between a (numeric, automatically generated) identifier and a (textual) label is the way to go?
bh...@google.com <bh...@google.com> #4
Is it any hope? We have migrated our IP address to the server with different role, and now the name of this IP address resource doesn't match its role at all. It seems to be trivial enough to momentary reserve static IP address of the old named resource, drop resource, and immediately recreate it with the new name and the old IP address.
bh...@google.com <bh...@google.com> #5
This would also improve life when using the Google Deployment Manager (since it otherwise error's out if you've changed a name of an IP)
Description
Problem you have encountered:
pip install
from GAR index does not allow any caching within pip. The behavior of GAR Python Repositories prevents pip from caching any responses from GAR's Python Index.What you expected to happen:
pip install
should pull from the GAR index the first time, subsequent calls should allow pip cache to pull from its prior local cache. It currently does not due to GAR returning 307 to returned packages.Steps to reproduce:
pip install -vv
from that indexOther information (workarounds you have tried, documentation consulted, etc):
Open Pip issuehttps://github.com/pypa/pip/issues/10694
No other google documentation available
This affects all
pip install
s, not just from CI. Pip's cachecontrol only considers(200, 203, 300, 301, 308)
as cacheable status codes. In that issue, there's a response from a Microsft Dev from Azure that states that Azure's GAR equivalent has the same issue.Breaking local pip cache completely while using private indexes really prevents us from using GAR, and we might end up using a different product completely.