| 2 Aug 2023 |
 raitobezarius | Planning Time: 1.121 ms
JIT:
Functions: 20
Options: Inlining true, Optimization true, Expressions true, Deforming true
Timing: Generation 11.320 ms, Inlining 1887.909 ms, Optimization 239.903 ms, Emission 327.814 ms, Total 2466.946 ms
Execution Time: 39210.169 ms
| 18:10:22 |
 das_j | We talked about that and I have no valuable input as my knowledge about that isn't too good | 18:10:27 |
| raitobezarius | here's the cost of a explain analyze select count(*) from builds; | 18:10:30 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @janne.hess:helsinki-systems.de
We talked about that and I have no valuable input as my knowledge about that isn't too good we need to decide on the partition key | 18:10:38 |
| raitobezarius | either IDs or dates | 18:10:41 |
| raitobezarius | or whatever locally makes sense | 18:10:45 |
| raitobezarius | and we don't have to lock a choice, we can just try things | 18:10:53 |
 K900 (deprecated) | Wait what is it even doing, a full scan? | 18:11:22 |
| raitobezarius | but database design is indeed another separate concern from the web part, etc. | 18:11:24 |
| raitobezarius | In reply to @k900:conduit.0upti.me
Wait what is it even doing, a full scan? lol | 18:11:28 |
| raitobezarius | are you ready? | 18:11:29 |
| raitobezarius | Finalize Aggregate (cost=1666154.70..1666154.71 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=39057.027..39207.028 rows=1 loops=1)
-> Gather (cost=1666153.87..1666154.68 rows=8 width=8) (actual time=39047.839..39206.943 rows=9 loops=1)
Workers Planned: 8
Workers Launched: 8
-> Partial Aggregate (cost=1665153.87..1665153.88 rows=1 width=8) (actual time=38801.196..38801.202 rows=1 loops=9)
-> Parallel Index Only Scan using indexbuildsontimestamp on builds (cost=0.57..1596964.67 rows=27275678 width=0) (actual time=0.445..37043.934 rows=24248822 loops=9)
Heap Fetches: 0
| 18:11:37 |
| K900 (deprecated) | Cause like just truncate the sodding thing WHAT | 18:11:42 |
| raitobezarius | yes exactly my reaction | 18:11:51 |
| K900 (deprecated) | A 30 seconds index scan? | 18:11:56 |
| raitobezarius | parallel index scan sir | 18:12:05 |
| raitobezarius | with JIT and 8 workers | 18:12:10 |
| raitobezarius | on fucking 1M read IOPS NVMe | 18:12:17 |
| raitobezarius | just to be clear | 18:12:19 |
| K900 (deprecated) | imma go get drunk | 18:12:20 |
| raitobezarius | :'DDDDDDDDDD | 18:12:24 |
| 3 Aug 2023 |
|  @lotte:chir.rs changed their profile picture. | 12:48:23 |
| 4 Aug 2023 |
 @linus:schreibt.jetzt | https://github.com/NixOS/hydra/pull/1296 | 13:57:33 |
 ma27 | In reply to @raitobezarius:matrix.org
hahhaha it's such a shame you were not here in Munich when das_j presented us with regarding gems in hydra, my favorite one is still https://github.com/NixOS/hydra/blob/60e2c377d305b72cee39c51b5892d215e4238278/src/script/hydra-eval-jobset#L47-L61 %) | 16:57:45 |
| 5 Aug 2023 |
|  alfurqani joined the room. | 22:45:38 |
| 6 Aug 2023 |
|  @thobys:inpt.fr changed their display name from Simon Thoby to nighmared. | 13:09:37 |
| @thobys:inpt.fr changed their display name from nighmared to nightmared. | 13:09:48 |
| 7 Aug 2023 |
|  nf changed their profile picture. | 09:41:23 |
 @antifuchs:asf.computer | with the github status check reporter, is there a way to set a "summary" status with a consistent name? I would like to make the "all hydra builds have passed" status a requirement to merge pull requests (via branch protection rules), but there's no way to identify them in the rule - they all have the jobset name on them, which varies by PR | 17:06:14 |
| @antifuchs:asf.computer | huh, it seems that https://github.com/NixOS/hydra/blob/master/src/lib/Hydra/Plugin/GithubStatus.pm#L46 should prevent the PR ID from going onto the job name in the status already? But then, my statuses are named like ci/hydra:home:pr-307:nixos.flynn (to just pr-, not -pr-...) | 17:09:35 |
