From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id sD9fJNHSQ18yHwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:46:41 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id ELY3INHSQ19wSAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:46:41 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2139C94053D for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 14:46:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:59432 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kADk7-0006fc-Sl for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:46:39 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48624) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kADfy-0006Dk-Qn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:42:23 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:46281) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kADfx-00050H-VA; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:42:22 -0400 Received: from [2001:660:6102:320:e120:2c8f:8909:cdfe] (port=41092 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kADfx-0007xF-4i; Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:42:21 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: Mathieu Othacehe Subject: Improving CI throughput References: <3308cccb-0f9f-6499-b948-3062a8a81ec8@web.de> <874kpriytq.fsf@gnu.org> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 8 Fructidor an 228 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 16:42:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: <874kpriytq.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Othacehe's message of "Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:55:13 +0200") Message-ID: <877dto2jhw.fsf_-_@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Guix-devel Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: 5lHWgrjPAuxO Hi, Mathieu Othacehe skribis: > The current situation is that due to Cuirass/offloading issues such as > [1], our build farm is most of the time idle. Given our computation > power, we should be able to bake much more substitutes I think. > > Maybe we could also take advantage of the build-coordinator Christopher > is implementing (+ Guix daemon RPC's over HTTP) to make sure that we are > able to deal with a distributed build farm efficiently. > > Now the question I'm asking myself is: could the ARM substitutes > situation be solved by improving our CI software stack, or do we really > need more hardware? Yeah, this is a ridiculous situation. We should do a hackathon to get better monitoring of useful metrics (machine load, time-of-push-to-time-to-build-completion, etc.), to clearly identify the bottlenecks (crashes? inefficient protocol? scheduling issues? Cuirass or offload or guix-daemon issue?), and to address as many of them as we can. Any volunteers? :-) Ludo=E2=80=99.