ok, then the issue isn't an orchestration but resource one - this applies to all jobs on your instance, not just the ones from a specific flow - and you should use https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Locks+and+Latches+plugin to ensure your selenium jobs don't run concurrently
2014/1/10 silver <[email protected]> > I can’t run the jobs in parallel because I’m resource limited on my > Selenium hub. > > They do *not* depend on each other sequentially. > > The use case is that I need a group of jobs to run through to completion > in succession, not parallel, but at the end, if at any point a job had > failed, to fail the build…not ignore failures. There is a guard/rescue for > try/finally. Why not have a try/catch equivalent? That’s basically what I > need, I think. > > On Jan 10, 2014, at 8:32 AM, nicolas de loof <[email protected]> > wrote: > > This isn't supported at this time - I don't really get your use-case > why can't you run those jobs in parallel ? If they actually depend on each > other sequentially, why not stop the flow when first one fails ? > > > 2014/1/10 silver <[email protected]> > >> Nicolas, >> >> Do you have a recommendation on how I can accomplish the goal at hand? >> Otherwise, I see no other option but to try Marc's groovy script. >> >> Thanks. >> >> On Jan 10, 2014, at 2:51 AM, nicolas de loof <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> I don't recommend such a fully programmatic approach, build-flow is >> designed as a DSL, admittedly not constrained to just supported keywords >> (because I didn't know how to do this when I started this plugin) but >> clearly not supposed to be used to create such a groovy script. >> >> >> 2014/1/10 Marc MacIntyre <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> You are overthinking it :) The trick is to grab the return value from >>> the build() call and check the result of that, then explicitly set the >>> failure state of the buildflow. >>> >>> This is what I'm doing; it's more solution than you need, but it solves >>> your problem. >>> >>> This buildflow takes a map of jobs and the pass criteria, and fires >>> everything off in parallel. If you want to retry on failures, that's >>> supported, and/or you can start several in parallel and pass if some >>> portion of them pass. We use job names as the map key, so if you want to >>> start multiple runs of a particular job with different params, you'll need >>> to modify the script somewhat. >>> >>> def createBuildClosure(String jn, Map args, int retryCount = 0) { >>> // This indirection is needed to force a clone of args, so it's out >>> of scope and gets >>> // re-bound to the closure each time - otherwise jenkins will >>> deduplicate our builds. >>> def ags = args.clone() >>> ags.put("_dedup", java.lang.System.nanoTime()) >>> if (retryCount) { >>> return { retry(retryCount) {build(ags, jn)} } >>> } else { >>> return {build(ags, jn)} >>> } >>> } >>> >>> def startParallelRuns(Map buildsToRun) { >>> def m = [:] >>> buildsToRun.each { >>> jobName, params -> >>> def maxFailures = params.get("maxFailures", 0) >>> def retryCount = params.get("retryCount", 0) >>> println "Running "+jobName+" "+params.count+" times (max >>> failures "+maxFailures+")" >>> for (int idx = 0; idx < params.count; idx++) { >>> m.put(jobName+"_"+idx, createBuildClosure(jobName, >>> params.args, retryCount)) >>> } >>> } >>> >>> ignore(FAILURE) { >>> join = parallel(m) >>> } >>> >>> results = [:] >>> // process the results by job name >>> buildsToRun.each { >>> jobName, params -> >>> def passcount = 0 >>> def maxFailures = params.get("maxFailures", 0) >>> for (int idx = 0; idx < params.count; idx++) { >>> run = join[jobName+"_"+idx] >>> if (run.result == SUCCESS) { passcount += 1} >>> } >>> result = (params.count - passcount) > maxFailures ? FAILURE >>> : SUCCESS >>> println ""+result+": "+jobName+": >>> "+passcount+"/"+params.count+" passed (Max failures: "+maxFailures+")" >>> results[jobName] = result >>> } >>> return results >>> } >>> >>> build_params = params.clone() >>> >>> // Modify your build params here >>> build_params.put('UPSTREAM_JOB', build.project.name) >>> >>> buildsToRun = [ >>> job1: [count: 1, maxFailures: 0, args: build_params, retryCount: 2], >>> job2: [count: 1, maxFailures: 0, args: build_params], >>> job3: [count: 1, maxFailures: 0, args: build_params], >>> jobX: [count: 2, maxFailures: 0, args: build_params], >>> jobY: [count: 1, maxFailures: 0, args: build_params], >>> ] >>> >>> >>> results = startParallelRuns(buildsToRun) >>> build.state.result = results.any { job, result -> result == FAILURE} ? >>> FAILURE : SUCCESS >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 8:22 PM, silver <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Sorry for any confusion. The line: ”println(“There were >>>> “+FailuresPresent+" test(s) that failed”);" is outside of the if statement >>>> resulting in the example output at the end of this message. >>>> >>>> On Jan 9, 2014, at 9:55 PM, silver <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> > When I run jobs in parallel, the Build Flow fails or passes as I’d >>>> expect. Example: >>>> > >>>> > parallel ( >>>> > { build(job1) }, >>>> > { build(job2) }, >>>> > { build(job3) }, >>>> > ) >>>> > >>>> > All of the jobs are started and if they all pass, the Build Flow >>>> passes. If one fails, the Build Flow fails. >>>> > >>>> > What I’d like to do is to run jobs sequentially, ignoring a failure >>>> *for that moment* but at the end, fail or pass the Build Flow as a whole. >>>> Using “ignore(FAILURE)" doesn’t give me what I want because it will ignore >>>> a failure and pass the Build Flow regardless: >>>> > >>>> > ignore(FAILURE) {build(job1)} >>>> > ignore(FAILURE) {build(job2)} >>>> > ignore(FAILURE) {build(job3)} >>>> > >>>> > If they all fail, the Build Flow still passes because failures are >>>> ignored. But I really need ALL of the jobs to run no matter the outcome of >>>> the other jobs, and the Build Flow to pass/fail, depending on each outcome. >>>> > >>>> > Therefore, I have tried something like this (which I thought I got to >>>> actually work at one point but I can’t get it to work again!?! The closest >>>> I can get is explained further down.): >>>> > >>>> > FailuresPresent = 0; >>>> > try { >>>> > build(job1) >>>> > }catch(e) { >>>> > FailuresPresent = FailuresPresent++; >>>> > } >>>> > try { >>>> > build(job2) >>>> > }catch(e) { >>>> > FailuresPresent = FailuresPresent++; >>>> > } >>>> > try { >>>> > build(job3) >>>> > }catch(e) { >>>> > FailuresPresent = FailuresPresent++; >>>> > } >>>> > if ( FailuresPresent>0) { >>>> > println(“There were “+FailuresPresent+" test(s) that failed”); >>>> > throw new Exception("FAILED!”); >>>> > }else { >>>> > println "Tests PASSED!"; >>>> > } >>>> > >>>> > But the Build Flow will still stop immediately after a failed job (I >>>> don’t see my println at the end). If I use an ignore(FAILURE) wrapper, >>>> then the “catch” is ignored and the Build Flow passes. >>>> > >>>> > I am not using guard/rescue because I don’t need the FailuresPresent >>>> to increment every time, only when there is a failure (or do I? >>>> Guard/Rescue is like try/finally, not a try/catch.) >>>> > >>>> > None of my jobs are dependent on another, I just want them all >>>> grouped together and to run sequentially in a single Build Flow if >>>> possible. Running them in parallel maxes out my resources (not Jenkins but >>>> my Selenium hub). >>>> > >>>> > If I wrap the above jobs in a parallel statement, it seems to gives >>>> the appearance of it finishing to completion (my print statement at the end >>>> is seen) but the Build Flow doesn’t run the other jobs. >>>> > >>>> > This is the output with the entire try/catch/builds wrapped in a >>>> parallel statement (notice job2 and job3 aren’t run but my println at the >>>> end is seen: >>>> > >>>> > parallel { >>>> > Schedule job job1 >>>> > Build job1 #34 started >>>> > job1 #34 completed : UNSTABLE >>>> > } >>>> > There were 0 test(s) that failed >>>> > Tests PASSED! >>>> > >>>> > Suggestions? I hope I’m over-thinking this. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Marc MacIntyre >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Jenkins Users" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >>> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Jenkins Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
