-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(ci): removed the matrix option from unit testing #6394
Conversation
CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this means the components-ui
units no longer run ./scripts/run-component-tests.js
right
non-matrix CI's passing anyhow, but doesn't look like GH actions expose memory usage to confirm
as an aside locally test:unit
with jest ./app/components/UI/
only hitting 2.7GB ram max now for a node process 🎉 so we might be able to revert the temp fix before Jest v29 cc @Gudahtt
@leotm The updated action is actually running: |
yep nth missing and updated GH action runs that ^ coverage remains the same 👍 but CI no longer runs |
Interesting. So I guess whatever was causing the explosion in memory usage has been fixed. I wonder what the culprit was. Perhaps the known Jest memory leak that has no solution until v29 was just a small part of the problem, and the bigger issue was something else entirely. |
Either way, this seems to work, so I guess we're good for now! We can reduce memory usage further with Jest v29 as we had planned. Nit: is there any point in keeping around the subdivided unit test scripts, and the Bash script I wrote for the component tests? May as well delete them, I doubt they'll be much use locally. |
@Gudahtt I was going to remove the script in another PR. The memory leak was resolved in another PR. We are trying to keep changes small. |
Development & PR Process
release-xx
label to identify the PR slated for a upcoming release (will be used in release discussion)needs-dev-review
label when work is completedneeds-qa
label when dev review is completedQA Passed
label when QA has signed offDescription
Remove the matrix set of unit tests to allow for a single code coverage file generation. The CI run time is approx. +/- 2 min the same as the existing matrix.
Screenshots/Recordings
NA
Issue
NA
Checklist