You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I noticed that there is a lot of redundancy in the Pixi lockfile.
For instance, there is a unique entry for each package at the end of the lockfile, but then for each environment, the package's source is repeated in full.
Wouldn't it be efficient to use a hash map to assign a small id to each of those unique packages and use that small id in the environments section?
I think this would reduce the size considerably when a project has tons of environments sharing features and solve groups.
Not sure about the slowdowns involved with the extra steps parsing/creating that map.
This could also be done only if a certain threshold of redundancy is met.
Just my two cents.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Problem description
I noticed that there is a lot of redundancy in the Pixi lockfile.
For instance, there is a unique entry for each package at the end of the lockfile, but then for each environment, the package's source is repeated in full.
Wouldn't it be efficient to use a hash map to assign a small id to each of those unique packages and use that small id in the environments section?
I think this would reduce the size considerably when a project has tons of environments sharing features and solve groups.
Not sure about the slowdowns involved with the extra steps parsing/creating that map.
This could also be done only if a certain threshold of redundancy is met.
Just my two cents.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: