From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 384D0207D6 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 15:19:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1173297AbdDXPTZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:19:25 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f51.google.com ([209.85.214.51]:36081 "EHLO mail-it0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1173292AbdDXPTT (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:19:19 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f51.google.com with SMTP id g66so64440566ite.1 for ; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:19:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=z4kf/hPSClqbxZqgGqK3qBdILMt8y97v7F3bA8eaI7g=; b=cxScmY4eF3hqmhDY/PHdMsz7LTEuZWmqUGmumk72ub/7lCdVWEc5wxG6qW9HjmENRM qIZpbQMprMdIFDQVe48RGxnoo9ceJA17LY9iBsOd7j6/Mhb6vXVlZbZm6RKw/GwtEp3n ThvnVSAIuI+L9UCryJ3kKY852HeAhz7gm9hGMnJkSNdZVl0zrLutt+CquZESJtmniqH6 8s/Y9PW/gohIPxfpTo69nxqZiMsRnabUJB0DCu5P9ZT7HTPd2nI0UhLQYtSXwqfI4H3c a+gupusSpS4Oyj1Oc3zpc8Lto7ZkNhbzixN5oMYg7wWW4PTgoruhRWGT5Jxy9yNuwCYe sjQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=z4kf/hPSClqbxZqgGqK3qBdILMt8y97v7F3bA8eaI7g=; b=i/KXjxylPXjfe5bbEdb1+/EyEa0mXu4EEp8ePgS+NObPkqqPxkwuPgFXPy3Mbtxpm/ P5lgR4kC928zoDUEcG/ycMz2BmSg1Jx58t6J9qyyTFmkovSIjr0eaSsl1AzQFVL7q81X NuL4+gQCpObjOtVTOy9aqYiBln3206aPuSwv/eKJMOPJw53sw6/8sCWk7COik4A6D7xl U6wYcqfOEvQaO93mowXXVEzFciWpjvIn00hqCrJG11hqmNj8YKnnyIusJ04oHrRLFCDh Yge5Ias3Pm28Zb2QiBF3PRoSohuOhwNeg4wVRtZeTCuF6h0rH21P2ZYzJv488Ys72+TY mDBg== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/4jzhAVhoBNmiyTXobzxt49rYWF5mtJbCz6o/DJBZAaV7G/tjEl bx3mtWXX4wi3Fzd16h2TSrT6KsPv1g== X-Received: by 10.36.103.86 with SMTP id u83mr13506693itc.91.1493047158193; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:19:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.134.97 with HTTP; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:18:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 17:18:57 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2017, #04; Wed, 19) To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Junio C Hamano , Lars Schneider , Git Mailing List , Jeff King , Brandon Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi Junio, > > On Sun, 23 Apr 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >> > Part of the reason is that you push out all of the branches in one go, >> > typically at the very end of your work day. The idea of Continuous >> > Integration is a little orthogonal to that style, suggesting to build >> > & test whenever new changes come into the integration branch. >> > >> > As a consequence, my original setup was a little overloaded: the VM >> > sat idle most of the time, and when you pushed, it was overloaded. >> >> I do not see pushing out all them in one go is making the problem worse >> for you, though. > > Oh no, you don't see that? Then let me spell it out a little more > clearly: when you push out four branches at the same time, the same > Virtual Machine that hosts all of the build agents has to build each and > everyone of them, then run the entire test suite. > > As I have pointed out at several occasions (but I was probably complaining > too much about it, so you probably ignored it), the test suite uses shell > scripting a lot, and as a consequence it is really, really slow on > Windows. Meaning that even on a high-end VM, it typically takes 1.5 hours > to run the test suite. That's without SVN tests. > > So now we have up to four build agents banging at the same CPU and RAM, > competing for resources. Now it takes more like 2-3 hours to run the > entire build & test. > > The situation usually gets a little worse, even: you sometimes push out > several iterations of `pu` in relatively rapid succession, "rapid" being > relative to the time taken by the builds. > > That means that there are sometimes four jobs still hogging the VM when > the next request to build & test `pu` arrives, and sometimes there is > another one queued before the first job finishes. > > Naturally, the last two jobs will have started barely before Travis > decides that it waited long enough (3 hours) to call it quits. > > To answer your implied question: the situation would be much, much better > if the branches with more time in-between. > > But as I said, I understand that it would be asking you way too much to > change your process that seems to work well for you. Is getting the results of these builds time-critical? If not perhaps an acceptable solution would be to use a source repo that's time-delayed, e.g. 24hrs behind on average from Junio's git.git, and where commits are pushed in at some configurable trickle. >> As of this writing, master..pu counts 60+ first-parent merges. >> Instead of pushing out the final one at the end of the day, I could >> push out after every merge. Behind the scenes, because some topics >> are extended or tweaked while I read the list discussion, the number >> of merges I am doing during a day is about twice or more than that >> before I reach the final version for the day. >> >> Many issues can be noticed locally even before the patches hit a >> topic, before the topic gets merged to 'pu', or before the tentative >> 'pu' is pushed out, and breakage at each of these points can be >> locally corrected without bothering external test setups. I've been >> assuming that pushing out all in one go at the end will help >> reducing the load at external test setups. > > Pushing out only four updates at the end of the day is probably better > than pushing after every merge, for sure. > > Ciao, > Dscho