>> We could come to the compromise of running them on m-c, m-a, m-b and m-r. >> Only this would help a lot since most of the load comes from m-i and try. We >> could make it a non-by-default platform on try.
I wonder if we should do the same for debug 10.6 tests (and maybe builds). The fact of the matter is that coalescing reduces our test coverage on m-i as it is; so long as we run these tests on central and we're OK with occasional bustage there, this seems pretty reasonable to me. On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Alex Keybl <ake...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> We could come to the compromise of running them on m-c, m-a, m-b and m-r. >> Only this would help a lot since most of the load comes from m-i and try. We >> could make it a non-by-default platform on try. > > This strategy would prevent any holes in our coverage, but accomplish the > goal of reducing load. Seems very reasonable, given how infrequently I've > seen tests fail for one OS X version but not another. > > -Alex > > On Apr 25, 2013, at 11:02 AM, "Armen Zambrano G." <arme...@mozilla.com> wrote: > >> On 2013-04-25 1:40 PM, Andreas Gal wrote:> >> > How many 10.7 machines do we operate in that pool? >> > >> > Andreas >> 84 of them are 10.6 >> 86 of them are 10.7 >> >> Unfortunately, we have a lot of them down (maybe a dozen) trying to fix them >> (broken hard drives, bad memory, NIC). They don't have warranty. >> >> On 2013-04-25 1:55 PM, Justin Lebar wrote: >>> It would be nice if we had data indicating how often tests fail on >>> just one version of MacOS, so we didn't have guess how useful having >>> 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8 tests are. That's bug 860870. It's currently >>> blocked on treeherder, but maybe it should be re-prioritized, since we >>> keep running into cases where this data would be helpful. >>> >> It would be nice indeed. >> >>> Anyway, disabling the 10.7 tests sounds reasonable to me given no >>> data, but maybe we continue running these tests on m-c? Maybe we also >>> deprecate the 10.7 tests on tryserver, so you only get the tests if >>> you really really want them? >>> >> We could come to the compromise of running them on m-c, m-a, m-b and m-r. >> Only this would help a lot since most of the load comes from m-i and try. We >> could make it a non-by-default platform on try. >> I assume that the wait times for 10.6 should be good enough but we should be >> willing to revisit later down the road if they get bad again. >> >> We can start with decreasing the load and visit again down the road. >> >> Sounds good? >> >> cheers, >> Armen >> _______________________________________________ >> dev-platform mailing list >> dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
