Skip to content
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

Can't run two concurrent asv jobs in same directory #377

Open
astrofrog opened this issue Mar 3, 2016 · 5 comments
Open

Can't run two concurrent asv jobs in same directory #377

astrofrog opened this issue Mar 3, 2016 · 5 comments
Labels
idea Low-priority enhancement suggestion

Comments

@astrofrog
Copy link
Contributor

I tried doing this, but all concurrent jobs try and build the project in the same env sub-directory

@pv
Copy link
Collaborator

pv commented Mar 3, 2016

The only way to do this would be to use different environments for the different runs, as the project also needs to be installed in the env.

@pv pv added the enhancement Triaged as an enhancement request label Mar 3, 2016
@astrofrog
Copy link
Contributor Author

I wonder if we could add a flag that means 'randomize the environment ID for this run' or something similar.

@pv
Copy link
Collaborator

pv commented Mar 3, 2016

Probably better would be to use a different env_dir for the different parallel runs.
Also probably needs some locking in producing the output files etc.

@pv
Copy link
Collaborator

pv commented Mar 3, 2016

For example, if some magic is ok here, using env/1/a9747819ec1127665def08a36932eab6 as a fallback if it is determined that env/a9747819ec1127665def08a36932eab6 is locked by a different asv process.

@mdboom
Copy link
Collaborator

mdboom commented Apr 13, 2016

I think it's going to be pretty hard to do this kind of parallelism from the outside, since we can't control how it's done. There is some support for parallel environment building, however. I guess I need a better sense of the use case here.

@pv pv added the idea Low-priority enhancement suggestion label Jun 1, 2019
@pv pv removed the enhancement Triaged as an enhancement request label Jun 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
idea Low-priority enhancement suggestion
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants