I don't think I'm comfortable disabling this platform across the board, or even disabling debug-only runs across the board.
As jmaher pointed out, there are platform differences here. If we disable this platform entirely, we lose visibility into rare but, we seem to believe, possible events. It seems like the only reason to disable everywhere instead of only on m-i/try (or running less frequently on m-i, like we do with PGO) is that the former is easier to implement. It seems like we're proposing taking a lot of risk here to work around our own failings... On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Armen Zambrano G. <arme...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > On 2013-04-26 12:14 PM, Justin Lebar wrote: >>> >>> Would we be able to go back to where we disabled 10.7 altogether? >> >> >> On m-i and try only, or everywhere? > > > The initial proposal was for disabling everywhere. > > We could leave 10.7 opt jobs running everywhere as a compromise and re-visit > after I re-purpose the first batch of machines. > > best regards, > Armen > > >> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Armen Zambrano G. <arme...@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Just disabling debug and talos jobs for 10.7 should reduce more than 50% >>> of >>> the load on 10.7. That might be sufficient for now. >>> >>> Any objections on this plan? >>> We can re-visit later on if we need more disabled. >>> >>> cheers, >>> Armen >>> >>> >>> On 2013-04-26 11:50 AM, Armen Zambrano G. wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Would we be able to go back to where we disabled 10.7 altogether? >>>> Product (Asa in separate thread) and release drivers (Akeybl) were OK to >>>> the compromise of version specific test coverage being removed >>>> completely. >>>> >>>> Side note: adding Mac PGO would increase the build load (Besides this we >>>> have to do a large PO as we expect Mac wait times to be showing up as >>>> general load increases). >>>> >>>> Not all reducing load approaches are easy to implement (due to the way >>>> that buildbot is designed) and it does not ensure that we would reduce >>>> it enough. It's expensive enough to support 3 different versions of Mac >>>> as is without bringing 10.9 into the table. We have to cut things at >>>> times. >>>> >>>> One compromise that would be easy to implement and *might* reduce the >>>> load is to disable all debug jobs for 10.7. >>>> >>>> cheers, >>>> Armen >>>> >>>> On 2013-04-26 11:29 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> As a compromise, how hard would it be to run the Mac 10.6 and 10.7 >>>>> tests on m-i occasionally, like we run the PGO tests? (Maybe we could >>>>> trigger them on the same csets as we run PGO; it seems like that would >>>>> be useful.) >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Ryan VanderMeulen <rya...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 4/26/2013 11:11 AM, Justin Lebar wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So what we're saying is that we are going to completely reverse our >>>>>>>> previous tree management policy? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Basically, yes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Although, due to coalescing, do you always have a full run of tests >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> the tip of m-i before merging to m-c? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes. Note that we generally aren't merging inbound tip to m-c - we're >>>>>> taking >>>>>> a known-green cset (including PGO tests). >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
