Re: [petsc-dev] It would be really nice if you could run a single job on the pipeline with a branch
> On Sep 23, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Jed Brown wrote: > > "Smith, Barry F. via petsc-dev" writes: > >>> On Sep 22, 2019, at 11:26 PM, Balay, Satish wrote: >>> >>> Even-though a fix addresses a breakage in a single build - that change >>> could break other things so its generally best to run a full test. >> >> Sure before a merge we want everything tested but when one is iterating on >> a single bug it would be a much better use of resources > > FWIW, any containerized jobs can easily be run locally. > > I think there would be complexity for GitLab to deploy this due to > artifacts and other state that may create dependencies between jobs, but > for our independent jobs, it should be possible. Yes I have done this and it was straightforward to debug problems that arose on the cloud tests. I have added the information to the wiki https://gitlab.com/petsc/petsc/wikis/Home feel free to add more details or corrections
Re: [petsc-dev] It would be really nice if you could run a single job on the pipeline with a branch
"Smith, Barry F. via petsc-dev" writes: >> On Sep 22, 2019, at 11:26 PM, Balay, Satish wrote: >> >> Even-though a fix addresses a breakage in a single build - that change >> could break other things so its generally best to run a full test. > > Sure before a merge we want everything tested but when one is iterating on > a single bug it would be a much better use of resources FWIW, any containerized jobs can easily be run locally. I think there would be complexity for GitLab to deploy this due to artifacts and other state that may create dependencies between jobs, but for our independent jobs, it should be possible.
Re: [petsc-dev] It would be really nice if you could run a single job on the pipeline with a branch
> On Sep 22, 2019, at 11:26 PM, Balay, Satish wrote: > > Even-though a fix addresses a breakage in a single build - that change > could break other things so its generally best to run a full test. Sure before a merge we want everything tested but when one is iterating on a single bug it would be a much better use of resources > > However if I need to run a single (or a few) test(s) - I would do [not > an elegant solution you are looking for]: > > - start a new pipeline with the fix > - cancel this pipeline > - restart only the selected runs [within this pipeline] YES! > > The status in the MR will reflect that the pipeline failed [due to all the > other canceled jobs] > > Satish > > On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, Smith, Barry F. via petsc-dev wrote: > >> >> When you fix something on a branch that broke a particular job in >> gitlab-ci it would be nice to be able to run that single job on the updated >> branch instead of having to submit an entirely new pipeline >> >> Does this exist? Should this be requested in gitlab-ci issues? Could we >> make a work around where we hack .gitlab-ci.yml based on a variable to >> return immediately except on the one truly desired job? >> >> >> >> >> >
Re: [petsc-dev] It would be really nice if you could run a single job on the pipeline with a branch
Even-though a fix addresses a breakage in a single build - that change could break other things so its generally best to run a full test. However if I need to run a single (or a few) test(s) - I would do [not an elegant solution you are looking for]: - start a new pipeline with the fix - cancel this pipeline - restart only the selected runs [within this pipeline] The status in the MR will reflect that the pipeline failed [due to all the other canceled jobs] Satish On Mon, 23 Sep 2019, Smith, Barry F. via petsc-dev wrote: > >When you fix something on a branch that broke a particular job in > gitlab-ci it would be nice to be able to run that single job on the updated > branch instead of having to submit an entirely new pipeline > >Does this exist? Should this be requested in gitlab-ci issues? Could we > make a work around where we hack .gitlab-ci.yml based on a variable to return > immediately except on the one truly desired job? > > > > >
