Hi Junwang, Not sure about others but I usually only change status to "Ready for review" when CI has passed.
Regards, Manu On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 3:21 PM Junwang Zhao <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 11:20 AM Junwang Zhao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 24, 2026 at 12:13 PM Steven Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Kevin's PR of removing Spark 3.4 was merged a few days ago. It should > reduce the Spark CI cost by ~25%. > > > > > > Some heavy-hitter test classes in Spark tests (core and extension) > cause high load due to parameter combinations. I asked AI to analyze the > build log and recommend changes offering the best ROI. Details are in this > doc. > > > > > > I can look into dropping some combinations without sacrificing > essential coverage. E.g., we can probably drop the Hadoop catalog usage in > test, as it wasn't recommended for production use anyway. > > > > iceberg-cpp skips Actions for draft PRs [1] to reduce CI resource > > usage a little bit. Perhaps we should apply the same approach across > > all iceberg subprojects? > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/680 > > I've created a PR to show that, see [1], since it's a draft, the CI > won't run. If I click the `Ready for review` button, the actions will > be triggered. Let me know what you think about it. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/16561 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 8:22 AM Matt Butrovich <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >> Apache DataFusion similarly received this notice. For visibility to > the Iceberg community, we have tracking issues to try to discuss solutions: > > >> > > >> https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/22455 > > >> https://github.com/apache/datafusion-comet/issues/4406 > > >> > > >> DataFusion Comet is consuming the vast majority of DataFusion > resources, and like the Iceberg project it's due to Spark tests (and > Iceberg's Spark tests). We are doing some analysis on what subsets might be > appropriate for our workflows, features, and goals, and will share anything > that we think might translate back to the Iceberg CI workflows. > > >> > > >> On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 7:43 AM Robert Thomson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Hello, Iceberg PMC. > > >>> > > >>> In 2024, the ASF introduced the policy for GitHub Actions usage > > >>> across the foundation[1]. The ASF Github shared pool of > > >>> Github-hosted runners has been at, or very close to the limit of > > >>> 900 jobs most of the time in the past few weeks and this is the > > >>> case again today. > > >>> > > >>> Your project has been identified as being among the top 5 consumers > of > > >>> build time over the past 7 days and we request that you bring your > > >>> usage down by stream-lining long-running builds. Contact Infra for > > >>> a consultation if you are unable to streamline your builds further. > > >>> > > >>> You can use the infra reporting tool[2] to monitor your GHA usage as > you > > >>> work on stream-lining, as well as locate any bottlenecks in the > workflows. > > >>> > > >>> Infra will allow you two weeks time (till the 8th of June, 2026) to > > >>> progress this, but should you still be above the limits by then, > > >>> without a viable path forward, we will be limiting your GHA usage. > > >>> > > >>> Kind regards, > > >>> Bob Thomson, on behalf of ASF Infrastructure. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> [1] https://infra.apache.org/github-actions-policy.html > > >>> [2] > https://infra-reports.apache.org/#ghactions&project=iceberg&hours=24&limit=15&group=name > > >>> > > > > > > -- > > Regards > > Junwang Zhao > > > > -- > Regards > Junwang Zhao >
