chore: run tests in parallel on GitHub Actions #10653
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Seems to work great. Comparing to #10650
While this is
|
|
Another advantage is that we actually run tests in parallel on CI, we have had bugs in the past just affecting parallel runs |
SimenB
changed the title
|
This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Faster CI is always 👍
From my testing
os.cpus()is accurate on GH actions: https://github.com/SimenB/available-cpuJest's default implementation is to leave one core alone, though, which is why I specify it: https://github.com/facebook/jest/blob/30e802036291f4c9c9fd4feef6faba485df54dd2/packages/jest-config/src/getMaxWorkers.ts#L28
If this works out, we should document it. We could also consider not doing
- 1ifis-cireturnstrue.Test plan
Looking at runtime on CI.