[#768] improvement(CI): Avoiding related issues by changing CI pipeline dependencies #1500
Conversation
qqqttt123
changed the title
|
|
||
| - name: Package Gravitino | ||
| run: | | ||
| ./gradlew build -x test -PjdkVersion=${{ matrix.java-version }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this step still required? As we've already build the project above.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the job name is 'Package Gravitino' and it is indeed a packaging task, the build task can be skipped and use compileDistribution directly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried. But It will fail. I recover the command.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I execute ./gradlew compileDistribution -x test locally without executing ./gradlew build, and it seems no error exists
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't work. You can see https://github.com/datastrato/gravitino/actions/runs/7536000721
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wander why ./gradlew compileDistribution -x test will trigger integration test...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wander why
./gradlew compileDistribution -x testwill trigger integration test...
We have next steps. The step which you mentioned doesn't trigger.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have already built the Gravitino in line 85, I was thinking why can't we reuse the built package?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
They're different jobs. Different jobs may be scheduled to different machines.
|
I recommend changing the title to "Avoiding Related Issues by Changing CI Pipeline Dependencies" or something similar. |
qqqttt123
changed the title
qqqttt123
changed the title
done. |
|
One thing I was thinking is what is the benefit of this change? I can see the total CI time will be increased because we make it in sequence, with the cost of it what was the actual benefit? |
We can save the resource of Github action. That's a good point. But for CI time, this is not a good choice. |
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Setting the job dependencies. There are some issues if we use two workflows. I change them to one workflow.
Why are the changes needed?
Fix: #768
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Tested in my repo.
qqqttt123#4