Closed Bug 1100386 Opened 7 years ago Closed 7 years ago

Repurpose servo-lion-r5-001 and servo-lion-r5-002

Categories

(Infrastructure & Operations Graveyard :: CIDuty, task, P2)

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: rail, Assigned: coop)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

We don't use them anymore for servo builds. They can be re-imaged and added to our build pool.
Let's split these between build and try:

servo-lion-r5-001 -> bld-lion-r5-095 (build)
servo-lion-r5-002 -> bld-lion-r5-096 (try)
Assignee: nobody → coop
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Priority: -- → P2
Yesterday we discussed the possibility of moving these two machines (and maybe a few others) to a different DC (phx?) to create a small pool as part of our disaster recovery plan.
(In reply to Chris Cooper [:coop] from comment #2)
> Yesterday we discussed the possibility of moving these two machines (and
> maybe a few others) to a different DC (phx?) to create a small pool as part
> of our disaster recovery plan.

This probably isn't happening soon. Let's proceed with the move to build/try.
Depends on: 1138672
this puts both servo machines in try pool as:
bld-lion-r5-095
bld-lion-r5-096
Attachment #8573015 - Flags: review?(coop)
Comment on attachment 8573015 [details] [diff] [review]
150304_mac-try-optimize_servo_bbotcfgs.patch

I should note this patch applies on top of: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=8573011&action=edit
I updated slavealloc to show that both 095 and 096 entries are in try pool

Should I delete servo-lion-r5-001 and servo-lion-r5-002 from slavealloc db?
(In reply to Jordan Lund (:jlund) from comment #6)
> I updated slavealloc to show that both 095 and 096 entries are in try pool
> 
> Should I delete servo-lion-r5-001 and servo-lion-r5-002 from slavealloc db?

Please do.
Attachment #8573015 - Flags: review?(coop) → review+
buildbot-config patch is in production
I've enabled the these slaves and they have started taking jobs. leaving open till we get a green confirmation.

Deleted old machine rows from slavealloc:
DELETE from slaves WHERE name = "servo-lion-r5-001";
DELETE from slaves WHERE name = "servo-lion-r5-002";
first job from each looks good, I'll leave them running. Hopefully when I come online tomorrow, that pattern persists :)
One failed build on 095, but that happens sometimes on Try. LGTM.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Product: Release Engineering → Infrastructure & Operations
Product: Infrastructure & Operations → Infrastructure & Operations Graveyard
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.