Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reorder CI jobs to allow for more concurrent PRs #9470

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 13, 2020

Conversation

mvines
Copy link
Member

@mvines mvines commented Apr 13, 2020

  • move goes to secondary, because we're not actively doing much with it right now
  • coverage must pass first, then stable, and then the PR is eligible for perf/bench/local-cluster. This will hopefully filter out red PRs and unlock machines faster

@mvines mvines requested a review from danpaul000 April 13, 2020 18:36
@danpaul000
Copy link
Contributor

+1 to moving move.

Adding both the wait steps into the mix will increase the minimum amount of time a single PR takes to get merged, assuming no bottleneck, such as off-peak-hours commits for our devs in Asia. Does stable depend on coverage, or could those two be run in parallel?

@danpaul000
Copy link
Contributor

I guess I'm just wondering where the most-likely to fail test step is and put that towards the front of the work queue. Do a lot of PRs fail on coverage? Let's put them through the most restrictive filter first.

@mvines
Copy link
Member Author

mvines commented Apr 13, 2020

Adding both the wait steps into the mix will increase the minimum amount of time a single PR takes to get merged, assuming no bottleneck, such as off-peak-hours commits for our devs in Asia.

Yeah I know :(

Does stable depend on coverage, or could those two be run in parallel?

Doesn't depend but a lot of the stable tests are also run in coverage, so if one of them fails then I don't want the other one to run at all, and coverage is faster so that was my logic for this ordering

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants