| 24 Mar 2025 |
 hexa | but apparently https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/367695 has not landed yet | 14:54:24 |
| hexa | * but apparently https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/367695 has not landed so far | 14:54:33 |
 Vladimír Čunát | That would be ~1 TB / month just from staging* rebuilds for this. | 14:59:17 |
 emily | right. I commented as much on the RFC. (from the RFC diff after the conversation earlier it seems like your earlier comment was misinterpreted as "the current normal cache growth rate is 2 TB/month compared to this being 700 GB one time"?) | 15:00:13 |
| emily | (rather than "this would add 2 TB/month rather than 700 GB one time, because of rebuilds") | 15:00:31 |
| emily | at least, the RFC claims that the current growth rate is 2 TB/month so we shouldn't worry about a one-time increase, but neither of those seems accurate | 15:00:51 |
 ElvishJerricco | So how much of a problem is this? Can we absorb a 15-30% hit to cache size growth? Or does that make the RFC a non-starter from an infra perspective? | 15:08:38 |
| emily | the infra team isn't the one paying the bills | 15:09:03 |
 toonn | Wasn't the sponsorship extension based on a commitment to reduce the size of the cache? | 15:14:08 |
| emily | that's my understanding, which I also mentioned in https://github.com/NixOS/rfcs/pull/185#issuecomment-2748339200 | 15:14:33 |
| emily | I just mean that's more Foundation than it is infra team, AFAIU | 15:15:05 |
| emily | they're the ones responsible for the bill ultimately | 15:15:17 |
| ElvishJerricco | Redacted or Malformed Event | 15:23:22 |
| ElvishJerricco | wrong room :P | 15:23:32 |
 raitobezarius | yes, there was even deduplication proposals using CAStore in the past | 15:28:44 |
|  sinan changed their display name from sinan (we're so back) to sinan. | 16:00:09 |
| sinan changed their profile picture. | 16:00:11 |
 K900 | Kicked unstable-small to pick up the kernel bumps | 16:03:25 |
