Alexey, First of all, “refuel” sounds very cool. Thanks for raising this topic, I would like to hear more opinions here. On one hand, different keyword would help to prevent unnecessary infrastructure load, I agree with you on that. And on another hand, using existing keywords helps to avoid confusion and provides expected behaviour for our CI jobs. Far too many times I’ve heard questions like “Why ‘recheck’ doesn’t retrigger Fuel CI jobs?”.
So I would like to hear more thoughts here from our developers. And I will investigate how another third party CI systems handle this questions. -- Igor Belikov Fuel CI Engineer ibeli...@mirantis.com > On 20 Nov 2015, at 16:00, Alexey Shtokolov <ashtoko...@mirantis.com> wrote: > > Igor, > > Thank you for this feature. > Afaiu recheck/reverify is mostly useful for internal CI-related fails. And > Fuel CI and Openstack CI are two different infrastructures. > So if smth is broken on Fuel CI, "recheck" will restart all jobs on Openstack > CI too. And opposite case works the same way. > > Probably we should use another keyword for Fuel CI to prevent an extra load > on the infrastructure? For example "refuel" or smth like this? > > Best regards, > Alexey Shtokolov > > 2015-11-20 14:24 GMT+03:00 Stanislaw Bogatkin <sbogat...@mirantis.com > <mailto:sbogat...@mirantis.com>>: > Igor, > > it is much more clear for me now. Thank you :) > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Igor Belikov <ibeli...@mirantis.com > <mailto:ibeli...@mirantis.com>> wrote: > Hi Stanislaw, > > The reason behind this is simple - deployment tests are heavy. Each > deployment test occupies whole server for ~2 hours, for each commit we have 2 > deployment tests (for current fuel-library master) and that’s just because we > don’t test CentOS deployment for now. > If we assume that developers will rertrigger deployment tests only when > retrigger would actually solve the failure - it’s still not smart in terms of > HW usage to retrigger both tests when only one has failed, for example. > And there are cases when retrigger just won’t do it and CI Engineer must > manually erase the existing environment on slave or fix it by other means, so > it’s better when CI Engineer looks through logs before each retrigger of > deployment test. > > Hope this answers your question. > > -- > Igor Belikov > Fuel CI Engineer > ibeli...@mirantis.com <mailto:ibeli...@mirantis.com> > >> On 20 Nov 2015, at 13:57, Stanislaw Bogatkin <sbogat...@mirantis.com >> <mailto:sbogat...@mirantis.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Igor, >> >> would you be so kind tell, why fuel-library deployment tests doesn't support >> this? Maybe there is a link with previous talks about it? >> >> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Igor Belikov <ibeli...@mirantis.com >> <mailto:ibeli...@mirantis.com>> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I’d like to inform you that all jobs running on Fuel CI (with the exception >> of fuel-library deployment tests) now support retriggering via “recheck” or >> “reverify” comments in Gerrit. >> Exact regex is the same one used in Openstack-Infra’s zuul and can be found >> here >> https://github.com/fuel-infra/jenkins-jobs/blob/master/servers/fuel-ci/global.yaml#L3 >> >> <https://github.com/fuel-infra/jenkins-jobs/blob/master/servers/fuel-ci/global.yaml#L3> >> >> CI-Team kindly asks you to not abuse this option, unfortunately not every >> failure could be solved by retriggering. >> And, to stress this out once again: fuel-library deployment tests don’t >> support this, so you still have to ask for a retrigger in #fuel-infra irc >> channel. >> >> Thanks for attention. >> -- >> Igor Belikov >> Fuel CI Engineer >> ibeli...@mirantis.com <mailto:ibeli...@mirantis.com> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org >> <mailto:openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org>?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> > > > > > -- > --- > WBR, Alexey Shtokolov > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
