!sBfrWMVsLoSyFTCkNv:nixos.org

OfBorg

164 Members
Number of builds and evals in queue: <TBD>60 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
28 Jun 2023
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hWhile I don't do it often, I do check the logs every once in a while to make sure they didn't change the API out from under us (hasn't happened yet, but)13:38:27
7 Jul 2023
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatA quick question, in case you know easily: do we control what version+features of Nix are used in the evals?16:20:07
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hI think so?16:20:32
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h goes to check 16:20:42
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunat I expect we want to use 2.3.x with just default features? (nixpkgs/lib/minver.nix) 16:21:13
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatIt's nothing urgent. It just came up in NixOS release-managing discussion.16:23:03
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hMaybe...16:23:10
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hIs there a case that would have been caught with 2.3 that wasn't?16:23:56
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatI'm not aware of any, but I expect it won't be hard to create some artificial one.16:24:41
@artturin:matrix.orgArtturinremember that 2.3 may have worse performance than 2.4+17:08:41
@artturin:matrix.orgArtturinlikely has17:08:53
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h Which is especially important when evals take 10 minutes on recent masters... 17:09:08
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hSo I'd be hesitant to even entertain the idea of pinning to 2.3 until I see an actual, non-contrived / non-forced issue caused by not using the Nixpkgs minver17:09:59
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatWe should probably measure the difference in performance on the particular expensive eval ofBorg is doing. Otherwise I don't trust it really.17:12:05
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h

I'll do so. On 5dd0190da9b5aecb5238c1bea1ebaa77f15c6a45, here are the time stats:

822.67user 14.59system 10:02.16elapsed 139%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 58247012maxresident)k
72088inputs+0outputs (0major+14564664minor)pagefaults 0swaps
17:13:06
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h Running 2.4pre20210810_a6ba313 (not an ofborg machine, but same type) 17:14:08
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h(I already bisected the largest increase in eval time to 4af22aab8e239b1ca28da851755c6da1a35fc91b, which made the leap from ~4-5m to like 7m, but not yet the remaining increase to 10m)17:17:20
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h * (I already bisected the largest increase in eval time to 4af22aab8e239b1ca28da851755c6da1a35fc91b, which made the leap from ~4-5m to like 7m, but not yet the remaining increase to 10m) 17:17:28
@artturin:matrix.orgArtturin2.3.16 and 2.4pre-rc1 have a difference of 3,902 commits https://github.com/NixOS/nix/compare/2.3.16...2.4pre-rc1 17:24:14
@artturin:matrix.orgArtturin * fun fact 2.3.16 and 2.4pre-rc1 have a difference of 3,902 commits https://github.com/NixOS/nix/compare/2.3.16...2.4pre-rc1 17:26:46
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h
$ GC_INITIAL_HEAP_SIZE=8g NIX_REMOTE= time nix-env -f ./outpaths.nix -qaP --no-name --out-path --arg checkMeta true >/dev/null
warning: unknown setting 'experimental-features'
805.99user 13.80system 13:39.89elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 54731940maxresident)k
0inputs+8outputs (1major+13685712minor)pagefaults 0swaps

13:40 on the same commit using Nix 2.13

17:31:47
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h *
$ GC_INITIAL_HEAP_SIZE=8g NIX_REMOTE= time nix-env -f ./outpaths.nix -qaP --no-name --out-path --arg checkMeta true >/dev/null
warning: unknown setting 'experimental-features'
805.99user 13.80system 13:39.89elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 54731940maxresident)k
0inputs+8outputs (1major+13685712minor)pagefaults 0swaps

13m40s on the same commit using Nix 2.13

17:31:51
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hErr Nix 2.317:33:15
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-hlol17:33:16
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h *
$ GC_INITIAL_HEAP_SIZE=8g NIX_REMOTE= time nix-env -f ./outpaths.nix -qaP --no-name --out-path --arg checkMeta true >/dev/null
warning: unknown setting 'experimental-features'
805.99user 13.80system 13:39.89elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 54731940maxresident)k
0inputs+8outputs (1major+13685712minor)pagefaults 0swaps

13m40s on the same commit using Nix 2.3

17:33:17
@cole-h:matrix.orgcole-h

(coming back) using 2.15.1:

$ GC_INITIAL_HEAP_SIZE=8g NIX_REMOTE= time nix-env -f ./outpaths.nix -qaP --no-name --out-path --arg checkMeta true >/dev/null
680.15user 11.32system 11:31.55elapsed 99%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 43949464maxresident)k
0inputs+0outputs (0major+11026151minor)pagefaults 0swaps
20:59:25
8 Jul 2023
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunat Hmm, so both CPU and RAM usage would be significantly worse. I thought of doing this for the tarball job instead, but the RAM requirements wouldn't most likely become a problem with the current infra. 08:05:06
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunat * Hmm, so both CPU and RAM usage would be significantly worse. I thought of doing this for the tarball job instead, but the RAM requirements would most likely become a problem with the current infra. 08:05:18
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatThe corresponding machines have only 64 GiB physical RAM.08:07:24
@sternenseemann:systemli.orgsterni
In reply to @cole-h:matrix.org
Is there a case that would have been caught with 2.3 that wasn't?
We already had path interpolation slip into master before: https://github.com/NixOS/ofborg/issues/612
08:55:27

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6