From 661fdbf51eb94ccfc664f930548c4e89ea5e5ff6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: yarikoptic Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2020 15:37:21 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added a comment: is -J shared between workers and ASYNC or "multipliticative"? --- .../comment_1_850d3eb7c04088041c96686b88c36662._comment | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/design/external_special_remote_protocol/async_appendix/comment_1_850d3eb7c04088041c96686b88c36662._comment diff --git a/doc/design/external_special_remote_protocol/async_appendix/comment_1_850d3eb7c04088041c96686b88c36662._comment b/doc/design/external_special_remote_protocol/async_appendix/comment_1_850d3eb7c04088041c96686b88c36662._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..2d5d76abf9 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/design/external_special_remote_protocol/async_appendix/comment_1_850d3eb7c04088041c96686b88c36662._comment @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="yarikoptic" + avatar="http://cdn.libravatar.org/avatar/f11e9c84cb18d26a1748c33b48c924b4" + subject="is -J shared between workers and ASYNC or "multipliticative"?" + date="2020-09-24T15:37:20Z" + content=""" +question: is ASYNC and parallel workers in annex share the `-J` somehow? I.e. if I start `annex get -J3 .` it would create three workers and then possibly talk to special remote(s). Special remotes then might announce support of ASYNC and accept multiple jobs. Would it be 3 active jobs across all workers+async or it would be up to 3*3=9 active jobs if every worker supports ASYNC? +"""]] -- 2.30.2