Skip to content
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

[ci] Move static tests into separate job #15890

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 27, 2019
Merged

Conversation

eps1lon
Copy link
Member

@eps1lon eps1lon commented May 27, 2019

Two longest jobs currently are test_unit and test_build. These have some steps that are don't depend on previous steps and therefore can be safely extract.

New job is called test_static which describes the steps good enough (format, lint, types, docs generation). Every (custom) step in this job could potentially run parallel to the other steps.

@eps1lon eps1lon added the test label May 27, 2019
@mui-pr-bot
Copy link

No bundle size changes comparing 44a6989...8e1fb22

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 8e1fb22

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

We only have 5 concurrent jobs available with Circle CI. Running 5 jobs means that a single pull request takes all the resource. Could that have a negative impact?

@eps1lon
Copy link
Member Author

eps1lon commented May 27, 2019

We only have 5 concurrent jobs available with Circle CI. Running 5 jobs means that a single pull request takes all the resource. Could that have a negative impact?

If we have 5 jobs available and this change doesn't go over the limit I don't see how this could cause any issues? If our builds can run in parallel then we were already starved anyway.

@oliviertassinari
Copy link
Member

oliviertassinari commented May 27, 2019

I was wondering if we would lose global throughput (because each test as a compressive yarn install setup, 5 yarn install is slower than 4), but even if we do, I agree with the approach, the feedback loop for the tests is very important, the shorter they are (for a given one), the more productive we can be 👍.

@eps1lon
Copy link
Member Author

eps1lon commented May 27, 2019

Sure it's not guarenteed that this will helps since I can't simulate heavy load on the CI environment. This is technically the better approach. We have to monitor how this works out (just like any other change).

If yarn install becomes the bottleneck we can scale the machine power. Just restoring cache already takes 30s which is quite long. Rrestoring node_modules/ might be the better approach. Another bottleneck might be compiling of pupeteer since it doesn't come with pre-built binaries.

@eps1lon eps1lon merged commit 24bbadf into mui:master May 27, 2019
@eps1lon eps1lon deleted the ci/balance-load branch May 27, 2019 17:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants