On Mon, Nov 26 2018, David Edelsohn wrote: > On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 6:16 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason > <ava...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> +CC cfarm-admins@ >> >> On Sun, Nov 25 2018, David Edelsohn via cfarm-users wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 5:53 PM Segher Boessenkool via cfarm-users >> > <cfarm-users@lists.tetaneutral.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi! >> >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 11:28:58PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason via >> >> cfarm-users wrote: >> >> > I got access to the farm a while ago to test free software projects I >> >> > work on, mainly git.git. I wanted to send a headsup about what I've been >> >> > up to. >> >> > >> >> > I'm setting up something where the integration branches of git.git are >> >> > smoke tested on various machines on the farm. See the Git ML >> >> > announcement at >> >> > https://public-inbox.org/git/875zwm15k2....@evledraar.gmail.com/ >> >> > >> >> > Currently I'm running things on these machines: >> >> > https://gitlab.com/git-vcs/git-gitlab-ci/blob/b8d4645891aa/.gitlab-ci.yml#L16-57 >> >> > >> >> > I've tried to be conservative about resources. It's all nice -n 19'd, >> >> > and with a conservative -j value relative to the number of cores: >> >> > https://gitlab.com/git-vcs/git-gitlab-ci/blob/b8d4645891aa/ci/gitlab/run-on-gcc-farm.sh#L62-163 >> >> >> >> At least for the Power machines, that isn't conservative at all. >> >> -j1 is conservative. -j24 is not conservative on a machine with 20 CPUs >> >> (gcc112), or 32 CPUs (gcc135). The AIX (gcc119) jobs seem to run for over >> >> an hour on half the machine? That's no good :-( >> > >> > The AIX systems unfortunately are I/O bound. >> > >> > One can run set up a temporary directory in the /scratch RAMDISK for >> > some improvement. >> >> Thanks. The /scratch directory exists on gcc119 and speeds things up by >> a *lot*, but doesn't exist on the other AIX machine, gcc111. Would it be >> possible to have /scratch be a ramdisk there too? > > It's possible, but gcc111 is an old system with an older release of > AIX. There's not a lot of reason to focus on it.
Thanks. I don't have any burning desire to test things there, but the reason I test on these obscure setups is because it often reveals edge cases in POSIX assumptions & other portability issues. So testing on older OS's also helps. But per the "[cfarm-users] GCC111 filesystem is very slow" it looks like others might have similar issues. _______________________________________________ cfarm-users mailing list cfarm-users@lists.tetaneutral.net https://lists.tetaneutral.net/listinfo/cfarm-users
