!sBfrWMVsLoSyFTCkNv:nixos.org

OfBorg

156 Members
Number of builds and evals in queue: <TBD>57 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
29 Sep 2023
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @7c6f434c:nitro.chat
I wonder if this will be an error-out during pure eval, though
lib.isPureEval
14:33:37
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster* `lib.inPureEvalMode`14:34:49
@7c6f434c:nitro.chat7c6f434cFortunately existence of stable branches would make tying to details of ofBorg deployments just too painful and impractical…14:38:34
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterStables branches or not, it's a bad and frail idea14:41:41
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterPlease don't seriously consider this in any capacity....14:42:19
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hMy problem with increasing the ofborg timeout on darwin is that the darwin builders are pretty slow as it is. I worry that that would cause the darwin queue to blow up (as has happened in the past even without a longer timeout). It would be interesting to explore an "ofborgWillTimeoutOnTheseSystems" predicate, though.15:40:09
@infinisil:matrix.org@infinisil:matrix.org cole-h: What about a dynamic approach: When the queue is too long, time out the longest-running job until it's short enough again 15:58:15
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk could we add a command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes 15:59:46
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk * could we add another command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes 15:59:54
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk * could we add another command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h aarch64-darwin or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes 16:00:06
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk * could we add another command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h aarch64-darwin or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment on the pr of a specific package? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes 16:00:24
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk * could we add another command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h polkadot aarch64-darwin or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment on the pr of a specific package? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes 16:00:31
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h
In reply to @infinisil:matrix.org
cole-h: What about a dynamic approach: When the queue is too long, time out the longest-running job until it's short enough again
As far as I know, RabbitMQ (what ofborg uses) is a "dumb" queue system. I don't know if we get information about the queue aside from the fact that there's a job we can take, and then communicating that we succeeded a job...
(I'm not all that familiar with RabbitMQ, however)
16:01:32
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h
In reply to @asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
could we add another command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h polkadot aarch64-darwin or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment on the pr of a specific package? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes
An interesting idea, but I think the problem with that is that 1) the timeout is set in the nix-build command (so there's no way to change it once the build has started running); and 2) the machine that processes comment commands is separate from the machines that run those commands (builds, evals, etc)...
16:03:22
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h
In reply to @asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
could we add another command to ofborg, so that one could do @ofborg set timeout 2h polkadot aarch64-darwin or something, on a case by case basis, as a github comment on the pr of a specific package? this would at least be a stopgap, and would mean we don't have to "pollute" meta with ofborg-specific attributes
* An interesting idea, but I think the problem with that is that 1) the timeout is set for the nix-build command (so there's no way to change it once the build has started running); and 2) the machine that processes comment commands is separate from the machines that run those commands (builds, evals, etc)...
16:03:38
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
In reply to @cole-h:matrix.org
An interesting idea, but I think the problem with that is that 1) the timeout is set for the nix-build command (so there's no way to change it once the build has started running); and 2) the machine that processes comment commands is separate from the machines that run those commands (builds, evals, etc)...

yeah i thought that we could either:

  1. add the comment in the PR body, so that it gets picked up before the job starts; or
  2. add the behaviour that when this comment is set, a build is restarted; or
  3. add a restart command which must also be used when using set timeout

i'm not sure i understand the implications of your point 2) though -- couldn't the comments-listening machine direct the building-machine?

16:06:12
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hMy point with #2 is that (as far as I know), the coordinator doesn't know which machine took the job, so how should it determine which build machine to inform about the change? (I think the simplest depiction of how it all works, from my knowledge, is GitHub webhook -> ofborg-core (coordinator) -> AMQP server <-> ofborg-eval-X (evaluator and builder)) But the "comment in PR body" could work, if ofborg is notified about that information (it must be, in some roundabout way, because we have access to the PR number)......16:10:11
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
In reply to @cole-h:matrix.org
My point with #2 is that (as far as I know), the coordinator doesn't know which machine took the job, so how should it determine which build machine to inform about the change? (I think the simplest depiction of how it all works, from my knowledge, is GitHub webhook -> ofborg-core (coordinator) -> AMQP server <-> ofborg-eval-X (evaluator and builder))
But the "comment in PR body" could work, if ofborg is notified about that information (it must be, in some roundabout way, because we have access to the PR number)......
ofborg-core being the php code running php? as that seems to be the thing that sits between hooks and rabbitmq
19:05:05
@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk@asymmetric:matrix.dapp.org.uk
In reply to @cole-h:matrix.org
My point with #2 is that (as far as I know), the coordinator doesn't know which machine took the job, so how should it determine which build machine to inform about the change? (I think the simplest depiction of how it all works, from my knowledge, is GitHub webhook -> ofborg-core (coordinator) -> AMQP server <-> ofborg-eval-X (evaluator and builder))
But the "comment in PR body" could work, if ofborg is notified about that information (it must be, in some roundabout way, because we have access to the PR number)......
* ofborg-core being the php code under ./php? as that seems to be the thing that sits between hooks and rabbitmq
19:05:17
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h Not solely that. The core machine also runs most of these binaries (that aren't build or eval related): https://github.com/NixOS/ofborg/tree/released/ofborg/src/bin 19:06:39
1 Oct 2023
@cafkafk:gitter.imcafkafk joined the room.14:39:06
@cafkafk:gitter.imcafkafkdisk full https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/258395/checks?check_run_id=1729277569214:39:14
@hexa:lossy.networkhexahttps://ofborg.org/prometheus/alerts hmm14:41:55
@hexa:lossy.networkhexadon't think we monitor the darwin machines in prometheus14:43:41
@lily:lily.flowersLily Foster
In reply to @hexa:lossy.network
don't think we monitor the darwin machines in prometheus
We do, but I bet they don't push that metric
14:45:15
@hexa:lossy.networkhexahttps://ofborg.org/prometheus/graph?g0.expr=node_os_info&g0.tab=1&g0.stacked=0&g0.show_exemplars=0&g0.range_input=1h14:45:36
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaI don't think we do 😄14:46:07
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterYeah looks like they are only sending ofborg metrics14:46:19
@lily:lily.flowersLily FosterNo system metrics14:46:23
@hexa:lossy.networkhexaoh14:46:30

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6