You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@river.apache.org by Sim IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl> on 2010/11/02 13:16:22 UTC
Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-QA #41
On 31-10-10 16:21, Jonathan Costers wrote:
> - create a new build called River-trunk-QA-solaris (same setup, but only run
> on solaris nodes)
Done as proposed.
> Both would be mutually exclusive, so both would never be running at the same
> time.
Oops. Will it really matter? River should survive in a chaotic network
environment shouldnt it?
Gr. Sim
--
QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-QA #41
Posted by Sim IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl>.
On 11/03/2010 09:21 PM, Jonathan Costers wrote:
> Could we also rename the current build to River-trunk-QA-ubuntu?
Yep. Do you do it?
Gr. Sim
Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-QA #41
Posted by Jonathan Costers <jo...@googlemail.com>.
2010/11/2 Sim IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl>
> On 31-10-10 16:21, Jonathan Costers wrote:
>
>> - create a new build called River-trunk-QA-solaris (same setup, but only
>> run
>> on solaris nodes)
>>
>
> Done as proposed.
>
Could we also rename the current build to River-trunk-QA-ubuntu?
> Both would be mutually exclusive, so both would never be running at the
>> same
>> time.
>>
>
> Oops. Will it really matter? River should survive in a chaotic network
> environment shouldnt it?
>
>
> Gr. Sim
>
> --
> QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
> Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
>
Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-QA #41
Posted by Jonathan Costers <jo...@googlemail.com>.
2010/11/3 Sim IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl>
> On 11/03/2010 09:12 PM, Jonathan Costers wrote:
>
>> Oops. Will it really matter? River should survive in a chaotic network
>>> environment shouldnt it?
>>>
>>>
>>> I've never tried to run many QA builds on the same network myself,
>> indeed it
>> would be interesting to see what happens.
>> One consideration would be the amount of consumed Hudson resources. We
>> would
>> be claiming one out of 2 ubuntu and one out of 2 solaris builder instances
>> for a long time ... Claiming either one or the other at the same time
>> would
>> spread that consumption more evenly.
>> Also, some of these tests probably assume a certain environment to be
>> present on the network.
>> For instance, a test may assume a number of Lookup services to be
>> discovered
>> on the network (because it knows how many it started itself)?
>>
>
> Valid concerns. The solaris job does not run automatically (yet). Do you
> see possibilities to mutually exclude jobs with the hudson locking system?
>
>
Not 100% sure with the current locks that are in place.
There are locks for long running jobs on each machine, maybe we can assign
both the one for long running jobs on Ubuntu as well as the one for long
running jobs on hudson.zones.apache.org (Solaris) to both the QA builds.
We may benefit from a custom "River-QA" lock, and assign it to both QA
builds.
> Gr. Sim
>
Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-QA #41
Posted by Sim IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl>.
On 11/03/2010 09:12 PM, Jonathan Costers wrote:
>> Oops. Will it really matter? River should survive in a chaotic network
>> environment shouldnt it?
>>
>>
> I've never tried to run many QA builds on the same network myself, indeed it
> would be interesting to see what happens.
> One consideration would be the amount of consumed Hudson resources. We would
> be claiming one out of 2 ubuntu and one out of 2 solaris builder instances
> for a long time ... Claiming either one or the other at the same time would
> spread that consumption more evenly.
> Also, some of these tests probably assume a certain environment to be
> present on the network.
> For instance, a test may assume a number of Lookup services to be discovered
> on the network (because it knows how many it started itself)?
Valid concerns. The solaris job does not run automatically (yet). Do you
see possibilities to mutually exclude jobs with the hudson locking system?
Gr. Sim
Re: Build failed in Hudson: River-trunk-QA #41
Posted by Jonathan Costers <jo...@googlemail.com>.
2010/11/2 Sim IJskes - QCG <si...@qcg.nl>
> On 31-10-10 16:21, Jonathan Costers wrote:
>
>> - create a new build called River-trunk-QA-solaris (same setup, but only
>> run
>> on solaris nodes)
>>
>
> Done as proposed.
>
>
Thanks!
>
> Both would be mutually exclusive, so both would never be running at the
>> same
>> time.
>>
>
> Oops. Will it really matter? River should survive in a chaotic network
> environment shouldnt it?
>
>
I've never tried to run many QA builds on the same network myself, indeed it
would be interesting to see what happens.
One consideration would be the amount of consumed Hudson resources. We would
be claiming one out of 2 ubuntu and one out of 2 solaris builder instances
for a long time ... Claiming either one or the other at the same time would
spread that consumption more evenly.
Also, some of these tests probably assume a certain environment to be
present on the network.
For instance, a test may assume a number of Lookup services to be discovered
on the network (because it knows how many it started itself)?
> Gr. Sim
>
> --
> QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl
> Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397
>