You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geode.apache.org by Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org> on 2018/08/08 18:32:53 UTC
[Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
All,
We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance, and
GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
- The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and
remains as the
max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when its serial (even in
the case where windows jobs beat the times of current jobs).
- The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see the
details.
Limitations:
- only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
- cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies until
we improve the job run times.
Our preference would be #1.
Sai
Re: [Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
Posted by Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org>.
Windows jobs are live and run in parallel to existing jobs.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:49 AM Dan Smith <ds...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> +1 for in parallel.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Parallel
> >
> > > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> sai_boorlagadda@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance,
> > and GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
> > > Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
> > >
> > > 1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
> > > 2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
> > >
> > > Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
> > > - The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and
> > remains as the max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when
> its
> > serial (even in the case where windows jobs beat the times of current
> jobs).
> > > - The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see
> > the details.
> > >
> > > Limitations:
> > > - only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
> > > - cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
> > >
> > > In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies
> > until we improve the job run times.
> > > Our preference would be #1.
> > >
> > > Sai
> >
>
Re: [Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
Posted by Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org>.
Windows jobs are live and run in parallel to existing jobs.
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:49 AM Dan Smith <ds...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> +1 for in parallel.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Parallel
> >
> > > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> sai_boorlagadda@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance,
> > and GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
> > > Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
> > >
> > > 1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
> > > 2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
> > >
> > > Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
> > > - The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and
> > remains as the max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when
> its
> > serial (even in the case where windows jobs beat the times of current
> jobs).
> > > - The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see
> > the details.
> > >
> > > Limitations:
> > > - only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
> > > - cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
> > >
> > > In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies
> > until we improve the job run times.
> > > Our preference would be #1.
> > >
> > > Sai
> >
>
Re: [Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
Posted by Dan Smith <ds...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for in parallel.
-Dan
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Parallel
>
> > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance,
> and GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
> > Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
> >
> > 1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
> > 2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
> >
> > Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
> > - The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and
> remains as the max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when its
> serial (even in the case where windows jobs beat the times of current jobs).
> > - The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see
> the details.
> >
> > Limitations:
> > - only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
> > - cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
> >
> > In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies
> until we improve the job run times.
> > Our preference would be #1.
> >
> > Sai
>
Re: [Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
Posted by Dan Smith <ds...@pivotal.io>.
+1 for in parallel.
-Dan
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Parallel
>
> > On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance,
> and GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
> > Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
> >
> > 1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
> > 2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
> >
> > Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
> > - The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and
> remains as the max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when its
> serial (even in the case where windows jobs beat the times of current jobs).
> > - The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see
> the details.
> >
> > Limitations:
> > - only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
> > - cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
> >
> > In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies
> until we improve the job run times.
> > Our preference would be #1.
> >
> > Sai
>
Re: [Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
Posted by Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>.
Parallel
> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance, and GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
> Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
>
> 1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
> 2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
>
> Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
> - The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and remains as the max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when its serial (even in the case where windows jobs beat the times of current jobs).
> - The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see the details.
>
> Limitations:
> - only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
> - cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
>
> In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies until we improve the job run times.
> Our preference would be #1.
>
> Sai
Re: [Proposal] Windows CI integration to 'develop' pipeline.
Posted by Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>.
Parallel
> On Aug 8, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> We would like to add windows jobs (UnitTests, Integration, Acceptance, and GfshDistributedTests) to the 'develop' pipeline.
> Looking for feedback on what the community wants to see:
>
> 1) Add windows jobs parallel to existing test jobs
> 2) Add windows jobs serial to the corresponding non-windows jobs
>
> Tradeoffs between 1 & 2
> - The advantage is the pipeline time is potentially unchanged and remains as the max of all jobs when parallel compared to doubling when its serial (even in the case where windows jobs beat the times of current jobs).
> - The downside is that its less readable and one has to zoom in to see the details.
>
> Limitations:
> - only a subset of DUnits are running (GfshTest category)
> - cannot run tests in parallel with docker at the moment
>
> In both cases, we are not planning to add the downstream dependencies until we improve the job run times.
> Our preference would be #1.
>
> Sai