From: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 8:26:43 AM Subject: stopping/aborting obsolete jenkins jobs Hi, It happened to me quite a lot lately, that I pushed a new patchset for a change, before jenkins finished running relevant jobs for previous patchsets, in some cases even before it started running some of them. Perhaps in such a case we should stop (if running) or disable/abort (if not yet running) all the jobs except for the ones running for the latest patchset?

This will both give quicker results for the dev/maint and lower the load on the slaves.

Best, -- Didi _______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra

=20 =20 ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt; > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 8:26:43 AM > Subject: stopping/aborting obsolete jenkins jobs >=20 > Hi, >=20 > It happened to me quite a lot lately, that I pushed a new patchset for a > change, > before jenkins finished running relevant jobs for previous patchsets, i=

> cases > even before it started running some of them. >=20 > Perhaps in such a case we should stop (if running) or disable/abort (if=

> yet > running) all the jobs except for the ones running for the latest patchs=

=20 =20 Happens to me a lot=20 I think that it should be automatic and if you are pushing version x+1 th=

=20 =20 >=20 > This will both give quicker results for the dev/maint and lower the loa=

> the > slaves. >=20 > Best, > -- > Didi > _______________________________________________ > Infra mailing list > Infra(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra >=20 _______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVSHD9AAoJEEBxx+HSYmnDHpMH/R3PI1LBMML8ly52ld8R+EcS xnagjpTOW/sp6VegmPflHRnI0j2Rlgsa6UjMVGJl14l0Q+dqZ0k7nwFfzl6kEaii h2Gdq0xqCVM1mrX8h0r9hBzC36kM1kYfaxHwWW8gLhjQVnHxLrnhjvtmFWOmj6RJ 8eWmP1yrkik2uoh2uzjvAY1pCLqg1R+Wyf7YdhmIfCqKiOaDS4lQuWricJNs1jxY 6ahXHBHzWLV4Gv8ijASDPlPymehGyGMZCyonA8uwsvioyFIGfd4yp+xXAinxCySm HYdnkhcT1jB2Oyx0Na+gL876Ovn68Ucn/8zywYS+fH4Iz6YIyTzy8BPxctjpuME= =aOD/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Eyal Edri" <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 1:42:47 PM Subject: Re: stopping/aborting obsolete jenkins jobs ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eyal Edri" <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: "Infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt; > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 10:19:57 AM > Subject: Re: stopping/aborting obsolete jenkins jobs > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Eyal Edri" <eedri(a)redhat.com&gt; > > To: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; > > Cc: "Infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt; > > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 10:15:21 AM > > Subject: Re: stopping/aborting obsolete jenkins jobs > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Yedidyah Bar David" <didi(a)redhat.com&gt; > > > To: "Infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org&gt; > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 8:26:43 AM > > > Subject: stopping/aborting obsolete jenkins jobs > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > It happened to me quite a lot lately, that I pushed a new patchset for > > > a > > > change, > > > before jenkins finished running relevant jobs for previous patchsets, > > > in > > > some > > > cases > > > even before it started running some of them. > > > > > > Perhaps in such a case we should stop (if running) or disable/abort (if > > > not > > > yet > > > running) all the jobs except for the ones running for the latest > > > patchset? > > > > not sure its possible, but its not something that you want to do > > (aggressive interrupt jenkins running or queue) > > > > > > > > This will both give quicker results for the dev/maint and lower the > > > load > > > on > > > the > > > slaves. > > > > > > > we are working on improving this on 2 fronts: > > 1. adding more slaves > > 2. reducing job running time (findbugs is currently being optimized) > > forgot one more thing - we added a new flag called 'workflow' which we are > testing now on the jenkins project. > this flag means that the developer marks: "my code is ready for review" > (might not be verified yet, since he wants early engagement before running > a > verification). > For jenkins it means that only when a developer will mark +1 on this patch > the jenkins jobs will start running on it (instead of running per > patchset). > > so if we're OK in adding this flag to engine/vdsm - it will reduce > dramatically the amount of running jobs. +1 , I am totally for it, we are waiting ages for tests completion so this flag will be great ...

> > > > > and you're welcome to join the effort of getting there next monday, on > > the > > infra hackathon :) [1] > > > > [1] > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PGGqI5tT_pmF7HUdg63FlozuVoQOBQaO-... > > > > > Best, > > > -- > > > Didi > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Infra mailing list > > > Infra(a)ovirt.org > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Infra mailing list > > Infra(a)ovirt.org > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Infra mailing list > Infra(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra >