We should probably reduce the scheduled build for the time being. As a reference, I worked in Apache Arrow, and they use an extra CI by thirdparty, e.g., see - PR: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/48915 - You comment like https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/48915#issuecomment-3852062184 - It posts the CI link like https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/48915#issuecomment-3852079993 - The CI is defined at https://github.com/ursacomputing/crossbow
I feel like this can be an alternative if any vendor is willing to support it. On Thu, 7 May 2026 at 04:09, Tian Gao via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > I did some quick calculations, and we can't afford the CI with our > existing infra. > > Per ASF policy (https://infra.apache.org/github-actions-policy.html), the > maximum weekly runner minutes we have is 250k. That's 1m per month, and > last month, we hit almost the exact number - 1,082,721 minutes. > > Our current CI consists of a few components (all numbers are per month): > * each commits on master branch - ~280k > * 4.1 scheduled run - ~200k > * 4.0 scheduled run - ~200k > * 3.5 scheduled run - negligible because we don't run many tests > * master scheduled run ~ 300k > > With the new release cadence, even if we only do scheduled run on 4.x > (which we shouldn't because it's an active dev branch but that's another > story), we need an extra 200k. With a 6-month maintenance window, we will > always have at least 3 active maintained versions (including LTS) that > require CI. > > If it's just 200k extra, maybe it's manageable. But I really believe we > need tests for the 4.x branch - we should treat that branch more like > master, than say 4.2. Even if we don't do pre-merge check on it, we should > do post-merge check for every commit. Daily check on an active dev branch > sounds a bit too risky to me. That would be another 300k. > > This does not include the discussion about any pre-merge check for 4.x, > which we should actually think about in the future. > > So the question is - how do we deal with that? The solutions I can think > of are > * Get some self-host runners and increase our CI capability limited by ASF > policy > * Optimize our CIs and tests so it takes less time to run > * Reduce the coverage of our tests so we can at least test all branches > > Any idea is welcome. > > Tian >
