Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 28, 2020. It is now read-only.

Acme air scripts runs longer than expected #31

Closed
mhdawson opened this issue Feb 25, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Acme air scripts runs longer than expected #31

mhdawson opened this issue Feb 25, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

I've set up the scripts and tweaked so we don't get a hang or kill the jenkins agent but it seems to spend a lot of time waiting at this point:

Perf logs stored in /home/iojs/workspace/benchmark-footprint-experimental-0.12.x/benchmarking/experimental/benchmarks/results///20160225-164357

Cleaning up

## END acmeair Archiving Thu Feb 25 16:49:26 CST 2016

@gareth-ellis can you take a look ?

The net is that the jobs take ~11 mins versus the ~6 that we expected. For example: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/benchmark-footprint-experimental/120/

@gareth-ellis
Copy link
Member

Do you mean after the END acmeair message we wait around for a while before them being killed off?

From the time stamps that are printed, it seems the acme air run (for 120 anyway) was 5mins 29 seconds.

I've checked in a change under 2db045c that keeps track of child pids (the sleep 600). This isn't a great way of doing it, it'd be good to understand why the getting children and grandchildren of this shell command in kill_bkg_processes isn't working on the benchmark machine.

That way, we could remove lots of the recording of PIDS throughout the script.

I commented out the line to get child and grandchild pids of the current shell and tested on a machine here, and my change seems to kill off the timeout now - I don't think I have access to relaunch the test on the community ci to double check there though.

@gareth-ellis
Copy link
Member

The runs over the weekend seem to be running faster - 6mins 59seconds for https://ci.nodejs.org/job/benchmark-footprint-experimental/125/ vs 11minutes for 120 .

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member Author

mhdawson commented Mar 1, 2016

The 6-7 minutes is closer to what I expected so your change probably made the difference.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member Author

Closing as resolved

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants