Skip to content

Conversation

@kazuki43zoo
Copy link
Contributor

@kazuki43zoo kazuki43zoo commented Sep 28, 2016

Currently build time is about 35-40 minute. However PR's solution is about 20-25 minute + about 1 minute as start time. (actual time see https://travis-ci.org/kazuki43zoo/spring-boot/builds)
And standard mode has an advantage that it's used a latest JDK version(1.8.0_101 at the point of now). (Note: container based mode is used 1.8.0_31 at the point of now)

Please consider to apply this PR.

@spring-projects-issues spring-projects-issues added the status: waiting-for-triage An issue we've not yet triaged label Sep 28, 2016
@philwebb philwebb added type: enhancement A general enhancement and removed status: waiting-for-triage An issue we've not yet triaged labels Sep 29, 2016
@philwebb philwebb added this to the 1.4.2 milestone Sep 29, 2016
@philwebb
Copy link
Member

Nice idea!

@wilkinsona
Copy link
Member

I think much of the speed benefits will come from enabling caching. I'd be interested to see the timings when caching is enabled on the container-based infrastructure.

@kazuki43zoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

kazuki43zoo commented Oct 12, 2016

@wilkinsona

I tried a build using the standard infrastructure (directory cache is disabled).

Elapsed time 23 min 36 sec

https://travis-ci.org/kazuki43zoo/spring-boot/builds/167121646

@kazuki43zoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

I tried a build using the standard infrastructure and enable cache.

At first build (= cache not exist) as follow:

Elapsed time 25 min 30 sec

https://travis-ci.org/kazuki43zoo/spring-boot/builds/167131699


At second build (= cache exist) as follow:

Elapsed time 22 min 17 sec

https://travis-ci.org/kazuki43zoo/spring-boot/builds/167142970

@snicoll snicoll self-assigned this Oct 24, 2016
snicoll added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 24, 2016
@snicoll snicoll closed this in 7c1f9eb Oct 24, 2016
@kazuki43zoo kazuki43zoo deleted the standard-travis-ci branch December 3, 2016 03:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

type: enhancement A general enhancement

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants