Closed
Bug 1244781
Opened 8 years ago
Closed 8 years ago
purge_builds belongs in runner, not mozharness
Categories
(Release Engineering :: Applications: MozharnessCore, defect)
Release Engineering
Applications: MozharnessCore
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: mozilla, Assigned: mozilla)
Details
Attachments
(7 files, 1 obsolete file)
11.00 KB,
text/plain
|
Details | |
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
jlund
:
review+
mozilla
:
checked-in+
|
Details |
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
jlund
:
review+
|
Details |
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
jlund
:
review+
mozilla
:
checked-in+
|
Details |
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
jlund
:
review+
|
Details |
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
Callek
:
review+
|
Details |
58 bytes,
text/x-review-board-request
|
jlund
:
review+
mozilla
:
checked-in+
|
Details |
1) verify that runner is running purge_builds for every platform (see bug 1191352 etc) 2) verify that runner is purging the maximum amount of space needed for the most disk-hungry build/test on that platform 3) remove purge_builds support from mozharness. this is more of a production infrastructure need rather than a job-specific need, and causes developers to nuke their homedirs when they run mozharness jobs locally. see bug 1131872
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•8 years ago
|
||
I'm not 100% sure how to do steps 1 and 2. I think runner is in https://github.com/mozilla/build-runner I think runner is run and configured on the build slaves via puppet. builds? * windows builds 35gb ** https://github.com/mozilla/build-puppet/blob/master/modules/toplevel/manifests/slave/releng/build.pp#L46 ** https://bug1191352.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=8662020 seems to suggest that windows purge is 10gb though? * non-windows builds 20gb ** https://github.com/mozilla/build-puppet/blob/master/modules/toplevel/manifests/slave/releng/build.pp#L71 tests: * ubuntu tests 4gb ** https://github.com/mozilla/build-puppet/blob/master/modules/toplevel/manifests/slave/releng/test.pp#L24 * darwin tests 4gb ** https://github.com/mozilla/build-puppet/blob/master/modules/toplevel/manifests/slave/releng/test.pp#L34 what about non-ubuntu non-darwin tests? Do we need purge_builds there?
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•8 years ago
|
||
I don't think tests have purge_builds in mozharness. The max purge_builds size in mozharness is 18, so runner is sufficient, assuming my assumed 35gb and 20gb in builds is accurate.
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•8 years ago
|
||
:markco, which assumption in comment 1 is correct, if any? * windows builds purge_builds 35gb, or * windows builds purge_builds 10gb ?
Flags: needinfo?(mcornmesser)
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•8 years ago
|
||
I need to learn how to use reviewboard.
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Assignee: nobody → aksasaki
Comment 5•8 years ago
|
||
35gb is needed on Windows. During testing in AWS we ran into an issue with PGO builds that needed more than 10gb cleared.
Flags: needinfo?(mcornmesser)
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•8 years ago
|
||
I'm going to clean up unit.sh as well. I'll try to keep these as separate patches for easier review.
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•8 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33289/diff/#index_header See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33289/
Attachment #8714970 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•8 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33291/diff/#index_header See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33291/
Attachment #8714971 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•8 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33293/diff/#index_header See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33293/
Attachment #8714972 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•8 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33295/diff/#index_header See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33295/
Attachment #8714973 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•8 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33297/diff/#index_header See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33297/
Attachment #8714974 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•8 years ago
|
||
Review commit: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33299/diff/#index_header See other reviews: https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33299/
Attachment #8714975 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Comment 13•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714809 [details] unit_sh_output iirc, this is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1230150#c18
Comment 14•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714970 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - stop running purge_builds in mozharness. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33289/#review30043 code lgtm. my primary concern is if we left some rogue platform / job out there that doesn't use runner. Or if it does use runner, if it uses the purge builds step. I'm not too familiar with that so that should get confirmed from someone if it hasn't been already.
Attachment #8714970 -
Flags: review?(jlund) → review+
Comment 15•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714974 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - fix unit.sh error when mercurial isn't an old version. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33297/#review30045 iirc - this issue went away with tox. how are you calling these tests? I wonder what tox means for unit.sh's future..
Attachment #8714974 -
Flags: review?(jlund)
Comment 16•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714975 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - mozharness has 3 post_run listeners now. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33299/#review30047 lgtm. thanks for this. I'm going to pause reviewing the other patches that involve unit.sh. I notice that there might be an overlap with tox here as it does some coverage / unittests for us and is self contained. context: https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/testing/mozharness/tox.ini https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1076810#c69
Attachment #8714975 -
Flags: review?(jlund) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 17•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jordan Lund (:jlund) from comment #15) > Comment on attachment 8714974 [details] > MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - fix unit.sh error when mercurial isn't an > old version. r?jlund > > https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33297/#review30045 > > iirc - this issue went away with tox. how are you calling these tests? I > wonder what tox means for unit.sh's future.. * I'm runnning with ./unit.sh * Tox probably means I should change unit.sh to run tox, but tox runs coverage + nosetests, and unit.sh runs coverage + nosetests + pyflakes + pylint, so overall unit.sh is running more stuff. * This issue went away with tox because it forces mercurial to be 2.6.2. This patch allows the test to run successfully in mercurial 2.6.2, or 3.6.3. I can open a new bug for this patch if you prefer.
Assignee | ||
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8714407 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8714971 -
Flags: review?(jlund) → review+
Comment 18•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714971 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - mozharness cleanup - update mozharness .hgignore. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33291/#review30115
Updated•8 years ago
|
Attachment #8714972 -
Flags: review?(jlund) → review+
Comment 19•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714972 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - silence mozharness pyflakes warnings. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33293/#review30119
Comment 20•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714973 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - mozharness pylint + pyflakes cleanup. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33295/#review30123 looks good. one comment that I think is worth discussing as a higher level decision. ::: testing/mozharness/requirements.txt:9 (Diff revision 1) > -mercurial==2.6.3 > +mercurial==3.7 new hotness.. ::: testing/mozharness/requirements.txt:11 (Diff revision 1) > +../mozbase/mozdevice hm, this would make a dep on all of gecko right? Do you think there is still value in allowing us to grab mozharness as a subdir archive from gecko and not worry about gecko deps?
Attachment #8714973 -
Flags: review?(jlund) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jordan Lund (:jlund) from comment #20) > Comment on attachment 8714973 [details] > MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - mozharness pylint + pyflakes cleanup. > r?jlund > > https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33295/#review30123 > > looks good. one comment that I think is worth discussing as a higher level > decision. > > ::: testing/mozharness/requirements.txt:9 > (Diff revision 1) > > -mercurial==2.6.3 > > +mercurial==3.7 > > new hotness.. > > ::: testing/mozharness/requirements.txt:11 > (Diff revision 1) > > +../mozbase/mozdevice > > hm, this would make a dep on all of gecko right? Do you think there is still > value in allowing us to grab mozharness as a subdir archive from gecko and > not worry about gecko deps? Ah. So we were discussing this after I posted the patch. I think I'm going to create a requirements-intree.txt and a requirements.txt. * requirements-intree.txt will contain relative paths to ../mozbase * requirements.txt will contain versioned mozbase modules that are installable via pypi. I still need to get the google play info from sylvestre to fix all the import warnings anyway, so we can either skip this patch for now, or land as-is with a couple followups (requirements-intree and sylvestre's dependencies).
Comment 22•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Aki Sasaki [:aki] from comment #21) > (In reply to Jordan Lund (:jlund) from comment #20) > > ::: testing/mozharness/requirements.txt:11 > > (Diff revision 1) > > > +../mozbase/mozdevice > > > > hm, this would make a dep on all of gecko right? Do you think there is still > > value in allowing us to grab mozharness as a subdir archive from gecko and > > not worry about gecko deps? > > Ah. So we were discussing this after I posted the patch. > I think I'm going to create a requirements-intree.txt and a requirements.txt. > * requirements-intree.txt will contain relative paths to ../mozbase > * requirements.txt will contain versioned mozbase modules that are > installable via pypi. > > I still need to get the google play info from sylvestre to fix all the > import warnings anyway, so we can either skip this patch for now, or land > as-is with a couple followups (requirements-intree and sylvestre's > dependencies). Fwiw, I use mozharness, as a standalone archive (downloaded via archiver) for the openh264 builds. And even when I transition it to TC scheduling/building was planned to still be essentially the same thing -- grabbed as a standalone since we don't need anything in gecko other than mozharness to build openh264. So there is certainly value in letting mozharness itself and related stuff work just fine as a downloaded package.
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•8 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Justin Wood (:Callek) from comment #22) > So there is certainly value in letting mozharness itself and related stuff > work just fine as a downloaded package. I agree, which is why the requirements.txt + requirements-intree.txt solution.
Assignee | ||
Comment 24•8 years ago
|
||
Sylvestre: do you remember where the apiclient.discovery module comes from in mozharness.mozilla.googleplay ?
Flags: needinfo?(sledru)
Comment 25•8 years ago
|
||
> Sylvestre: do you remember where the apiclient.discovery module comes from > in mozharness.mozilla.googleplay ? Sure, this is declared here: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/file/tip/testing/mozharness/requirements.txt#l24 google-api-python-client Hope this helps!
Flags: needinfo?(sledru)
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•8 years ago
|
||
https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=03a993394c79
Assignee | ||
Comment 27•8 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/f9649610cd9ce5d145a7de1e0a091381222ed570 bug 1244781 - stop running purge_builds in mozharness. r=jlund https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/4026ceb5a08324e451ca3177153abe46dcc6d683 bug 1244781 - silence mozharness pyflakes warnings. r=jlund https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/64305a23963a6ce00cc88f6eba95b207e54575ce bug 1244781 - mozharness has 3 post_run listeners now. r=jlund
Assignee | ||
Comment 28•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714970 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - stop running purge_builds in mozharness. r?jlund http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/f9649610cd9c
Attachment #8714970 -
Flags: checked-in+
Assignee | ||
Comment 29•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714972 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - silence mozharness pyflakes warnings. r?jlund http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/4026ceb5a083
Attachment #8714972 -
Flags: checked-in+
Assignee | ||
Comment 30•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714975 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - mozharness has 3 post_run listeners now. r?jlund http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/64305a23963a
Attachment #8714975 -
Flags: checked-in+
Assignee | ||
Comment 31•8 years ago
|
||
I landed the patches with no questions around them. I'll revisit the others. Oh, I guess the revisions got auto-commented, nice!
Assignee | ||
Comment 32•8 years ago
|
||
Resolving and opening a new bug for mh cleanup.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 8 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 33•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/f9649610cd9c https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/4026ceb5a083 https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/64305a23963a
Assignee | ||
Comment 34•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714974 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - fix unit.sh error when mercurial isn't an old version. r?jlund Since you've pinged me about it twice, I figured you may be motivated to review.
Attachment #8714974 -
Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek)
Comment 35•8 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8714974 [details] MozReview Request: bug 1244781 - fix unit.sh error when mercurial isn't an old version. r?jlund https://reviewboard.mozilla.org/r/33297/#review34217 The second ping was more me telling gps about it ;-) But sure
Attachment #8714974 -
Flags: review?(bugspam.Callek) → review+
Comment 37•8 years ago
|
||
bugherder |
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/a463f2cf51e3
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•