Message ID | pull.1308.git.1659097724.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | ci: fix the FreeBSD build | expand |
On 7/29/2022 8:28 AM, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote: > Since 3a251bac0d1a (trace2: only include "fsync" events if we git_fsync(), > 2022-07-18), the FreeBSD builds are failing in t5351.6. See > https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4577761405698048 for an example. The run at > https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6004115347079168 shows that this patch fixes the > bug. Thanks for noticing and fixing this bug. The FreeBSD build is slow and flaky enough that I sometimes ignore its output before submitting a series. Good that it will be green again. > While verifying the fix on Windows, I noticed a recent, rather terrible > performance regression: t5351 all of a sudden takes almost half an hour > [https://github.com/git/git/runs/7398490747?check_suite_focus=true#step:5:171] > to run on Windows. I found a fix, and it now passes in less than half a > minute > [https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/runs/7578071365?check_suite_focus=true#step:5:125] > again. Thanks for speeding this up! -Stolee
"Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > performance regression: t5351 all of a sudden takes almost half an hour > [https://github.com/git/git/runs/7398490747?check_suite_focus=true#step:5:171] > to run on Windows. I found a fix, and it now passes in less than half a > minute ;-) That's impressive.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 08:58:46AM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > On 7/29/2022 8:28 AM, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote: > > Since 3a251bac0d1a (trace2: only include "fsync" events if we git_fsync(), > > 2022-07-18), the FreeBSD builds are failing in t5351.6. See > > https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4577761405698048 for an example. The run at > > https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6004115347079168 shows that this patch fixes the > > bug. > > Thanks for noticing and fixing this bug. The FreeBSD build is slow It usually takes a little more than 7 minutes for a full run, which is IMHO less (at least wall time) than the whole CI does; could you elaborate on why being "slow" would warrant ignoring its failures? > and flaky enough that I sometimes ignore its output before submitting > a series. Good that it will be green again. I'd noticed that because it runs outside GitHub actions it sometimes has synchronization(ex [1]) issues, but that might be some bug on the integration with Cirrus which is easily avoided by looking instead directly to their status page: https://cirrus-ci.com/github/git/git Carlo