[Pulp-dev] Uniqueness constraints on Content in Pulp 3

David Davis daviddavis at redhat.com
Wed Nov 14 12:53:17 UTC 2018

Not currently, but we have an issue open to do so:



On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 5:59 PM Simon Baatz <gmbnomis at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 02:38:33PM -0500, David Davis wrote:
> >    I want to point out that the RPM example is not correct. RPMs are
> >    unique in Pulp by checksum (aka pkgId in our code and createrepo_c):
> >    [1]
> https://github.com/pulp/pulp_rpm/blob/44f97560533379ad8680055edff9c3
> >    c5bd4e859f/pulp_rpm/app/models.py#L223
> >    Therefore Pulp can store two packages with the same
> >    name-epoch-version-arch (NEVRA) as you would in the case where there
> is
> >    a signed and unsigned RPM with the same NEVRA.
> I missed that pkgId is the former Pulp 2 checksum.  Thanks for
> pointing that out!
> Thus, pulp_rpm seems to be in the "pulp_file camp" as well.  Does
> pulp_rpm prevent that two such packages (same NEVRA, different
> checksum) end up in one repo version/one publication?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20181114/9ce8fb62/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list