On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Kartikaya Gupta <kgu...@mozilla.com> wrote: > TL;DR: > * Inbound is closed 25% of the time > * Turning off coalescing could increase resource usage by up to 60% (but > probably less than this). > * We spend 24% of our machine resources on changes that are later backed > out, or changes that are doing the backout > * The vast majority of changesets that are backed out from inbound are > detectable on a try push
Thanks for collecting real data! A collage of thoughts follow. - The 'inbound was closed for 15.3068% of the total time due to "bustage"' number is an underestimate, in one sense. When inbound is closed at 10am California time, it's a lot more inconvenient to developers than when it's busted at midnight California time. More than 3x, according to http://oduinn.com/images/2013/blog_2013_02_pushes_per_hour.png. - Having our main landing repo closed multiple times per day, for a significant fraction of the time feels clownshoes-ish to me. For this reason, my gut feeling is that we'll end up doing something like what Kats is suggesting. My gut feeling is also that it won't end up changing the infrastructure load that much. - Any landing system that makes life harder for sheriffs is a problem. I'm not at all certain that Kats' proposal would do that, but that's my main worry about it. - A process whereby developers choose which tests to run on the official landing branch (be it inbound, or something else) feels like a bad idea. It's far too easy to get wrong. - Getting agreement on a significant process change is really difficult. Is it possible to set up a repo where a few people can volunteer to try Kats' approach for a couple of weeks? That would provide invaluable experience and data. Nick _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
