I would also prefer to throw more machines at it rather than restrict builds. I think that we should revisit the load when CI is functioning again for awhile and the backlog is caught up.
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:01 PM Nan Zhu <zhunanmcg...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 and recommend Jenkins-GitHub plugin with which committers/(accounts > with assigned permissions) can trigger Jenkins build with > > "Test this please, Jenkins!" > > "Retest this please, Jenkins!" > > And accounts in the list can trigger build automatically when submitting a > PR > > > https://wiki.jenkins.io/plugins/servlet/mobile?contentId=37749162#content/view/37749162 > > Best, > > Nan > ________________________________ > From: workc...@gmail.com <workc...@gmail.com> on behalf of Tianqi Chen < > tqc...@cs.washington.edu> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 7:54:05 PM > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: MXNet: Run PR builds on Apache Jenkins only after the commit > is reviewed > > I agree that have the CI is useful, at least make sure that lint stage is > done. > > Tianqi > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Hagay Lupesko <lupe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Build success or failure is a great feedback mechanism, of equal > importance > > to code review. Do we really want to delay it until another Dev gives a > > thumbs up? It feels like a step backwards from automation. > > > > If our problem is resource constraint, can't we address it by throwing > more > > instances into the pool? > > > > On Sep 11, 2017 6:28 PM, "shiwen hu" <yajiedes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Jenkins can be set to automatically cancel old builds, but I'm not sure > > if > > > it's already been set > > > > > > 2017-09-12 9:19 GMT+08:00 Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > Is the load artificially high because there's such a backlog due to > > other > > > > reasons? Many may be triggering trivial changes to kick off another > > build > > > > attempt (I have). > > > > > > > > Do new PR changes actually stop the old build or do those go to > > > completion? > > > > I realize they show on the PR as a new build has started, but are the > > old > > > > builds/tests always interrupted? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 6:12 PM Naveen Swamy <mnnav...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > Even a small change in the PR is initiating a new build, I think > this > > > is > > > > > needless and not serving any good purpose until a reviewer has > looked > > > > into > > > > > the PR. This is also adding unnecessary load on the mxnet build > > > pipeline > > > > > and slaves. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Naveen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Meghna Baijal < > > > > meghnabaijal2...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > We would like to initiate a change in the way the PR builds are > > being > > > > > > triggered. At the moment, every time a Pull Request is created, a > > > build > > > > > > gets triggered on Jenkins. Additional builds also get triggered > due > > > to > > > > > > changes to the same PR. > > > > > > Too many PR builds leads to resource starvation and very long > > queues > > > > and > > > > > > long build times. Hence we would like to add some checks where a > > > human > > > > > > reviewer manually marks it to something like “ok to build” > before a > > > PR > > > > > > build is triggered. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think this approach would be helpful and we should move > > > forward > > > > > > with it? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Meghna Baijal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
