On 13 Giu, 14:56, Les Mikesell <lesmikes...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Roberto Nunnari <nunni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi everybody. > > > I wonder how heavy the build processes are on the cpu.. > > > I set up a single machine offering many different services (also including > > jenkins webapp) and I'm worrying a bit about overall performance when > > jenkins will enter production stage. > > > Being a virtual machine, I will be able to add one virtual cpu if the load > > will be too much.. but I wonder if it also possible to set some > > configuration option so that the build processes are started with a high > > nice value. Another option I can think of would be to start jenkins main > > process with a nice value, but I don't know if that will be considered when > > jenkins will span the build processes. > > > So.. > > 1) build processes can be run at a lower priority? > > 2) If yes, how? > > Just in general, disk and memory contention are more of a problem with > overcommitted VMs than CPU. Builds tend to do a lot of disk > activity. > > > 3) build processes will be run one at a time or more than one in parallel? > > You can control the number of executors per machine, but if you have > multiple VMs acting as slaves sharing the same physical resources you > would need the 'throttle concurrent builds' plugins to coordinate > them. > > > Could anybody please cast some light on this? > > The best approach is to spread the activity over build slaves that > don't compete for resources, or at least not physical disk heads. If > that is not possible, maybe you can schedule builds to run at times > nothing else would be happening. > > -- > Les Mikesell > lesmikes...@gmail.com
Ok.. so.. if in the page 'jenkins >> nodes' I see only one entry named 'master' means there's only one executor and thus build jobs will be serial (ie next build will start only when other builds are finished), right? Thank you very much, Les!
