-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 167
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
Add IBMi machines to CI #1697
Comments
We have PR for ansible scripts(#1700). Just waiting on getting ccache rpm publicly available for IBMi. Current ETA is a couple of weeks. |
@mhdawson Is this still in progress? |
@Trott yes still in the works. Obviously, my ETA was a bit optimistic. It's now queued behind the work we are doing to switch to centos7 for PPC. |
I've ticked off the done items. We now have IBM i test machines in the CI and added to the libuv-test-commit job. |
I've created https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-ibmi/. It's WIP (some (known and unknown) test failures, tap2junit encoding issue) but does build and run tests. Summary of execution times: Cold (no existing workspace/git checkout/ccache):https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-ibmi/1/nodes=ibmi72-ppc64/
Subsequent build (with existing git checkout and ccache):https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-ibmi/4/nodes=ibmi72-ppc64/
These are on the slow side, particularly the test execution times. |
Once nodejs/node#34209 lands we'll have a green CI for IBM i, e.g. https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-ibmi/14/ for that pull request is green (🎉). The build times for IBM i in the CI are 1 hour 35 mins at best (and ~2 hours 50 mins in the worst case) which seems too long for the IBM i job to run as part of the regular CI. Are there any objections (once we land the aforementioned PR and get green) on adding the IBM i job to the daily master builds so it is run daily? We (IBM) will commit to keeping watch on the IBM i job and promptly address issues (i.e. the IBM members of the Build WG (@AshCripps @mhdawson and @richardlau) to address machine issues and @nodejs/platform-ibmi to fix any code issues). If there are no objections by, say, Monday 13th July I'll go ahead and add starting the IBM i job to the daily master job. cc @nodejs/build |
No objections to node-daily-master. So long as IBM is committed to following up with any problems that arise (which it certainly seems that they are), node-daily-master seems like the right place for it given the long run time. |
I've added IBM i to node-daily-master. |
This issue is stale because it has been open many days with no activity. It will be closed soon unless the stale label is removed or a comment is made. |
This issue is stale because it has been open many days with no activity. It will be closed soon unless the stale label is removed or a comment is made. |
I'm going to close this -- we did add machines and have IBM i running on each nodejs-daily-master. Anything further than that is blocked on build execution time, but that can be a follow up issue/pull request if anything changes. |
We have a couple of machines that we can add to the CI. Next steps include:
This will be good as a few weeks ago IBM i was broken by some libuv changes and we only discovered that a bit later.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: