On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 5:01 AM Krisztián Szűcs
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:59 AM Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > It sounds like this would be a good reason to use BuildKite, which AFAIU
> > can automatically provision and operate cloud resources for us?
> That's true for buildbot as well [1] including openstack and mesos support 
> which
> would be nice for physical machines.

I think we should try to reduce the number of services we have to
configure and sysadmin, it has a non-zero cost in time and money.

> With the ursa machines down we ended up with two missing services:
> - nightly trigger and report: I've already ported the cron jobs triggering the
>   builds and reporting to github actions [2]
> - the comment bot: it is implemented in ursabot including the github event
>   listener, so buildkite wouldn't provide a solution here because we need
>   to maintain a web service for it.
>
> The solution for the comment bot could be to factor out the implementation
> from ursabot and run it from a github actions build triggered using the
> issue_comment event [3] (buildkite doesn't seem to support it currently [4]).
>
> We can also host the buildbot buildmaster in the cloud, at least until we
> decomission all of its services.
>
> [1] 
> https://docs.buildbot.net/latest/manual/configuration/workers.html#supported-latent-workers
> [2] https://github.com/ursa-labs/crossbow/tree/master/.github/workflows
> [3] 
> https://help.github.com/en/actions/reference/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue-comment-event-issue_comment
> [4] https://github.com/buildkite/feedback/issues/288
> >
> >
> > Le 04/03/2020 à 16:21, Wes McKinney a écrit :
> > > hi folks,
> > >
> > > The tornado the night before last in Nashville, Tennessee temporarily
> > > disabled the physical hardware that I have been running there where
> > > we've been running "Ursabot" builds and where we've been experimenting
> > > with other self-hosted CI solutions like GitHub Actions Self-Hosted
> > > Runners and Buildkite.
> > >
> > > While dedicated physical hardware can be useful to reduce cloud
> > > computing costs, I think this natural disaster should help inform our
> > > approach to this problem:
> > >
> > > * In the event that physical hosted infrastructure becomes
> > > unavailable, we eventually should have the capability to spin up
> > > machines in the cloud with the desired properties (GCE provides both
> > > Linux and Windows VMs, for example)
> > > * Adding new machines to our CI process ideally should not require a
> > > human in-the-loop (GHA presently requires a human -- in particular
> > > someone from ASF Infra -- in the loop to add workers, so this IMHO
> > > should be taken into consideration)
> > >
> > > Any other thoughts about this topic would be welcome.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Wes
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 9:27 AM Krisztián Szűcs
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 3:53 PM Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 8:40 AM Krisztián Szűcs
> > >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:14 PM Wes McKinney <[email protected]> 
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> hi Ganesh,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for writing.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I've been working on setting up Buildkite (BK) as a way for third
> > >>>>> parties for attach machines to run builds on, with a free organization
> > >>>>> at
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> https://buildkite.com/apache-arrow
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Configuring a new machine to accept builds is very easy [1] and takes
> > >>>>> less than 60 seconds on Linux or macOS (though maybe a bit more work
> > >>>>> on Windows). Currently I've attached 6 machines:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> * 2 CUDA-capable Linux x86
> > >>>>> * 3 armhf machines (not super high-powered), 1 CUDA-capable
> > >>>>> * 1 macOS
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We're still waiting on ASF Infra to twiddle some bits so that builds
> > >>>>> triggered in BK can report commit statuses on GitHub [2]
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> It's possible we can use self-hosted GitHub Actions (GHA) for this
> > >>>>> also but the workflow for new machines to be contributed needs to be
> > >>>>> proven out.
> > >>>> I've already tried it out, and setting up self-hosted github runners 
> > >>>> is just as
> > >>>> easy as with buildkite, drawbacks:
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't mean to be argumentative, but I don't see how this can be true
> > >>> if we don't have access to the "Settings" tab on GitHub
> > >> On a fork where I have access for that tab.
> > >>>
> > >>> https://help.github.com/en/actions/hosting-your-own-runners/adding-self-hosted-runners
> > >>>
> > >>>> - I'm unsure how would the tagging selection work in practice [1]
> > >>>> - We won't have access to the runners dashboard in lack of admin rights
> > >>>>   for the apache/arrow repository - so we need to test out the 
> > >>>> workflow.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I've created an INFRA ticket to get some information and to track it:
> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19875
> > >>>>
> > >>>> [1] 
> > >>>> https://help.github.com/en/actions/configuring-and-managing-workflows/configuring-a-workflow#using-a-self-hosted-runner
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>> Wes
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [1]: 
> > >>>>> https://github.com/ursa-labs/dev-tools/blob/master/buildkite/debian_agent_bootstrap.sh
> > >>>>> [2]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19217
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:38 PM Ganesh Raju <[email protected]> 
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>> I am following up on the discussion from here
> > >>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/6253>, with interest to have
> > >>>>>> dedicated arm hardware for CI setup. We can surely help with that if 
> > >>>>>> we get
> > >>>>>> a go-ahead from the project.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>> Ganesh
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> IRC: ganeshraju@#linaro on irc.freenode.ne 
> > >>>>>> <http://irc.freenode.net/>t

Reply via email to