Tweaks to the wait times emails

RESOLVED FIXED

Status

Release Engineering
General
P5
normal
RESOLVED FIXED
8 years ago
5 years ago

People

(Reporter: joduinn, Unassigned)

Tracking

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: [buildmasters])

Attachments

(12 attachments, 3 obsolete attachments)

2.07 KB, patch
bhearsum
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.18 KB, patch
bhearsum
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.29 KB, patch
catlee
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.15 KB, patch
catlee
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1009 bytes, patch
catlee
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.13 KB, patch
catlee
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.40 KB, patch
catlee
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1.97 KB, patch
catlee
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.36 KB, patch
catlee
: feedback+
rail
: feedback+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
2.16 KB, patch
catlee
: review+
armenzg
: checked-in+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
561 bytes, text/plain
catlee
: review+
aki
: review+
Details
865 bytes, patch
rail
: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review
1) Can the "Build/Unittest" wait times emails be changed from:
win32, macosx, linux
... to:
win2k3, osx10.5, centos5, maemo4, maemo5gtk, maemo5qt

2) Can the "Talos" wait times emails be changed from:
leopard, win7, tiger, linux, xp, snowleopard
...to:
osx10.4, osx10.5, osx10.6, WinXP, Win7, fedora12, fedora12x64, maemo4, maemo5

3) The "Talos" wait times emails should probably be renamed to "Unittest/Talos", now that we have started running unittests on these minis.
Priority: -- → P3
Created attachment 438322 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes
Attachment #438322 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Created attachment 438323 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master02.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

Instead of `find ... -name '?*platform*' -not -name '?*platform64*'` style find(1) parameters, -regex and strict word boundaries (\b) are used.
Attachment #438323 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Created attachment 438324 [details] [diff] [review]
sm-try-master.b.m.o crontab changes

"Tagging" this patch as "not sure" because we have "wince-hg" builder, not sure if it "win2k3"...
Attachment #438324 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Created attachment 438325 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o crontab changes
Attachment #438325 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Created attachment 438327 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

1. Assuming that linux and fedora, linux64 and fedora64 are the same platforms, I've combined them.

2. Vista addedd

(In reply to comment #0)
> 2) Can the "Talos" wait times emails be changed from:
> leopard, win7, tiger, linux, xp, snowleopard
> ...to:
> osx10.4, osx10.5, osx10.6, WinXP, Win7, fedora12, fedora12x64, maemo4, maemo5

I haven't found any talos job for maemo4 and maemo5. Any idea which builders handle them?
Attachment #438327 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Priority: P3 → P2
(In reply to comment #5)
> Created an attachment (id=438327) [details]
> talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes
> 
> 1. Assuming that linux and fedora, linux64 and fedora64 are the same platforms,
> I've combined them.
Great.


> 2. Vista addedd
k.

> (In reply to comment #0)
> > 2) Can the "Talos" wait times emails be changed from:
> > leopard, win7, tiger, linux, xp, snowleopard
> > ...to:
> > osx10.4, osx10.5, osx10.6, WinXP, Win7, fedora12, fedora12x64, maemo4, maemo5
> 
> I haven't found any talos job for maemo4 and maemo5. Any idea which builders
> handle them?

Aki would know.



also, I note that recently the "production talos" for snowleopard are always zero. Did something change there in the last few days?

Comment 7

8 years ago
(In reply to comment #6)
> > I haven't found any talos job for maemo4 and maemo5. Any idea which builders
> > handle them?
> 
> Aki would know.

a) assuming this is run on the master, that would be production-mobile-master.
b) why do we want wait times for mobile? Jay/Stuart aren't asking for this.

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #438322 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+
Comment on attachment 438322 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

Do we need centos5x64 and osx10.6 builder support for production-master.b.m.o?
Comment on attachment 438323 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master02.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

I'm not sure how I feel about this since the mobile builds use the same pool of slaves as the desktop builds, the wait times for centos5/maemo* will all be about the same.

Wouldn't it make more sense to count the wait times for maemo along with centos?

Comment 10

8 years ago
(In reply to comment #8)
> (From update of attachment 438322 [details] [diff] [review])
> Do we need centos5x64 and osx10.6 builder support for production-master.b.m.o?

centos5x64 -> no
osx10.6 -> yes (we enabled 10.6 64 bit builds last week).
Comment on attachment 438325 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o crontab changes

I thought we disabled jss and are now running new dromaeo tests?  We should probably be getting the list of builders at run-time like we do for builds.
Attachment #438325 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review-
Comment on attachment 438327 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes


> python tools/buildfarm/maintenance/print_waits.py \
>-    -blinux:$LINUX_BUILDERS \
>-    -bxp:$XP_BUILDERS \
>-    -bwin7:$WIN7_BUILDERS \
>-    -bleopard:$LEOPARD_BUILDERS \
>-    -btiger:$TIGER_BUILDERS \
>-    -bsnowleopard:$SNOWLEOPARD_BUILDERS \
>+    -bfedora12:$LINUX_BUILDERS \
>+    -bfedora12x64:$LINUX64_BUILDERS \
>+    -bWinXP:$XP_BUILDERS \
>+    -bWin7:$WIN7_BUILDERS \
>+    -bWinVista:$WIN7_BUILDERS \

Should be -bWinVista:$VISTA_BUILDERS I think?
Attachment #438327 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review-
Created attachment 438701 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

(In reply to comment #10)
> (In reply to comment #8)
> > (From update of attachment 438322 [details] [diff] [review] [details])
> > Do we need centos5x64 and osx10.6 builder support for production-master.b.m.o?
> 
> centos5x64 -> no
> osx10.6 -> yes (we enabled 10.6 64 bit builds last week).

osx10.6x64 added
Attachment #438322 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #438701 - Flags: review?(catlee)
/me thinks about creating a hg repo for these wrappers and crontab entries.
Not sure if this repo should be private or public.
Created attachment 438712 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

(In reply to comment #12)
> Should be -bWinVista:$VISTA_BUILDERS I think?

Exactly. Fixed.
Attachment #438327 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #438712 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Created attachment 438715 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.try-talos.sh.diff

(In reply to comment #11)
> (From update of attachment 438325 [details] [diff] [review])
> I thought we disabled jss and are now running new dromaeo tests?  We should
> probably be getting the list of builders at run-time like we do for builds.

something like this?
Attachment #438715 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Created attachment 438716 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o crontab changes

Assuming we use print_waits.try-talos.sh
Attachment #438325 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #438716 - Flags: review?(catlee)

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #438715 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #438716 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #438712 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #438701 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+

Comment 18

8 years ago
(In reply to comment #14)
> /me thinks about creating a hg repo for these wrappers and crontab entries.
> Not sure if this repo should be private or public.

Yes please.
It would also help w/ stage cleanup etc.
Attachment #438323 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+
Attachment #438324 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+
Comment on attachment 438716 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o crontab changes

applied
Attachment #438716 - Flags: checked-in+
Comment on attachment 438715 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.try-talos.sh.diff

applied
Attachment #438715 - Flags: checked-in+
Comment on attachment 438712 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

applied
Attachment #438712 - Flags: checked-in+
Comment on attachment 438701 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

applied
Attachment #438701 - Flags: checked-in+
Comment on attachment 438324 [details] [diff] [review]
sm-try-master.b.m.o crontab changes

applied
Attachment #438324 - Flags: checked-in+
Comment on attachment 438323 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master02.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes

applied
Attachment #438323 - Flags: checked-in+
(In reply to comment #7)
> b) why do we want wait times for mobile? Jay/Stuart aren't asking for this.

John, Aki

do we want to see wait times for the mobile Talos jobs?

Comment 26

8 years ago
(In reply to comment #25)
> do we want to see wait times for the mobile Talos jobs?

Up to John. I don't particularly want them.

Comment 27

8 years ago
Created attachment 442423 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes add Centos x64 to PM
Attachment #442423 - Flags: review?(catlee)

Comment 28

8 years ago
Created attachment 442424 [details] [diff] [review]
production-master02.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes add OSX10.6 x64 to PM
Attachment #442424 - Flags: review?(catlee)

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #442424 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #442423 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+
(In reply to comment #26)
> (In reply to comment #25)
> > do we want to see wait times for the mobile Talos jobs?
> 
> Up to John. I don't particularly want them.

This came up in context of making mobile more integrated with rest of our infrastructure. Even if mobile group are not asking for this yet, it would be good for us to know how bad mobile wait times are - data like this helps when decisions about buying more phones, so good to have this data in advance.

(Note: if this is complicated/hard to do right now, and should wait until mobile infra is better integrated with desktop infra, thats fine - this is nice to have, not urgent.)
(In reply to comment #29)
> (In reply to comment #26)
> > (In reply to comment #25)
> > > do we want to see wait times for the mobile Talos jobs?
> > 
> > Up to John. I don't particularly want them.
> 
> This came up in context of making mobile more integrated with rest of our
> infrastructure. Even if mobile group are not asking for this yet, it would be
> good for us to know how bad mobile wait times are - data like this helps when
> decisions about buying more phones, so good to have this data in advance.
> 
> (Note: if this is complicated/hard to do right now, and should wait until
> mobile infra is better integrated with desktop infra, thats fine - this is nice
> to have, not urgent.)

Well, this would represent only mobile build wait times, not test wait times.  We'd need to set this script up on the mobile test master to get test wait times.  This is probably the source of the confusion here.  The patches and questions here have been specifically for the build/talos masters.

We could include the mobile builders into the count of jobs that the host platform is doing.

Comment 31

8 years ago
Created attachment 442797 [details] [diff] [review]
centralize wait times on one file and example of what a specific master would use

I was going to add few more adjustments for Linux 64 and I thought of centralizing the code.

What do you think?

There would a print_wait.master.sh per master.

Not that I have time to work on it but it was easier to write a sample than trying to explain with words on IRC.

I think it will help with the mobile jobs situation.
Attachment #442797 - Flags: feedback?(rail)
Attachment #442797 - Flags: feedback?(catlee)

Comment 32

8 years ago
Created attachment 442798 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes to add Fedora x64

To add Fedora x64 to the list of platforms.
Attachment #442798 - Flags: review?(catlee)

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #442798 - Flags: review?(catlee) → review+

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #442798 - Flags: checked-in+
Comment on attachment 442798 [details] [diff] [review]
talos-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh changes to add Fedora x64

>--- print_waits.sh      2010-03-08 22:35:56.000000000 -0800

>+LINUX64_BUILDERS=$(find $MASTER_DIR -maxdepth 1 -type d -name '?*fedora64*' -not -name '*release*' -not -name '*fedora*' -not -name '*l10n*' -printf "%p,")

This returns no matches - anything that matches *fedora64* is removed by the not *fedora*. What's the ? in '?*fedora64' there for ?
Created attachment 443317 [details]
production-mobile-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh
Attachment #443317 - Flags: review?(catlee)

Updated

8 years ago
Attachment #443317 - Flags: review?(catlee)
Attachment #443317 - Flags: review?(aki)
Attachment #443317 - Flags: review+

Comment 35

8 years ago
Comment on attachment 443317 [details]
production-mobile-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh

The n810s will slowly be migrating over to mobile-master2, but this is good for now.
Attachment #443317 - Flags: review?(aki) → review+
Comment on attachment 443317 [details]
production-mobile-master.b.m.o print_waits.sh

deployed on production-mobile-master.b.m.o
Attachment #443317 - Flags: checked-in+
Created attachment 444081 [details] [diff] [review]
Ignore builds with "rebuild" in the reason

Let's ignore rebuilds, as their wait times get mis-represented.
Attachment #444081 - Flags: review?(rail)
Comment on attachment 444081 [details] [diff] [review]
Ignore builds with "rebuild" in the reason

Looks fine.
Attachment #444081 - Flags: review?(rail) → review+
Comment on attachment 442797 [details] [diff] [review]
centralize wait times on one file and example of what a specific master would use

I like this idea!

Do all our builders on the various masters obey the same naming conventions?
Attachment #442797 - Flags: feedback?(catlee) → feedback+

Comment 40

8 years ago
(In reply to comment #39)
> (From update of attachment 442797 [details] [diff] [review])
> I like this idea!
> 
> Do all our builders on the various masters obey the same naming conventions?

WRT naming, the naming I considered were for pm and pm02 (for _BUILDERS) and talos master (for _TESTERS). I am not sure about the try master and the mobile masters.
Whiteboard: [buildmasters]
Comment on attachment 444081 [details] [diff] [review]
Ignore builds with "rebuild" in the reason

Could somebody push this changeset, so I can deploy it on servers.
Attachment #444081 - Flags: checked-in?

Comment 42

8 years ago
Comment on attachment 444081 [details] [diff] [review]
Ignore builds with "rebuild" in the reason

http://hg.mozilla.org/build/tools/rev/afc26be7f219
Attachment #444081 - Flags: checked-in? → checked-in+
(In reply to comment #42)
> (From update of attachment 444081 [details] [diff] [review])
> http://hg.mozilla.org/build/tools/rev/afc26be7f219

deployed on:

talos-master.mozilla.org
sm-try-master.mozilla.org
production-master02.build.mozilla.org
production-master.build.mozilla.org
talos-master02.build.mozilla.org
production-mobile-master.build.mozilla.org
Comment on attachment 442797 [details] [diff] [review]
centralize wait times on one file and example of what a specific master would use

A nit:

>+LINUX_BUILDERS="      find $MASTER_DIR $FIND_OPTIONS '.*linux.*'           $FIND_DISCARD"

This will eat the next one. Use '.*\blinux\b.*' instead.

>+LINUX64_BUILDERS="    find $MASTER_DIR $FIND_OPTIONS '.*\blinux64\b.*'     $FIND_DISCARD"
Attachment #442797 - Flags: feedback?(rail) → feedback+
Back to pool. All of the requested features have been implemented, some refactoring (Armen's idea! :) ) still remaining.
Assignee: rail → nobody
Status: ASSIGNED → NEW
Priority: P2 → P5

Comment 46

7 years ago
Is anyone going to work on this?
Should we close?

Comment 47

7 years ago
Let's close. I am not interested anymore on doing the refactoring.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 7 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(Assignee)

Updated

5 years ago
Product: mozilla.org → Release Engineering
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.