Attempt to cache LFS in GH actions #101
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Bit hard to see whether this properly working (up until its not) but perhaps we can give this a go @chatcannon. At least in the second commit it claims that the cache hit; not sure how easy this would be to see in your billing. |
chatcannon
approved these changes
Feb 6, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hopefully closes #100 by using a custom checkout action that caches LFS files for pulling within GH actions. It's a bit bizarre that GH charges so aggressively for this when the LFS is stored within their own network, but it doesn't look like this will change anytime soon (see actions/checkout#165). Hopefully this action works well enough that we don't need to roll our own solution.