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

Add CI script to retry builds #9572

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 9, 2016
Merged

Add CI script to retry builds #9572

merged 1 commit into from Feb 9, 2016

Conversation

@Manishearth
Copy link
Member

Manishearth commented Feb 8, 2016

We can then run test-ref as retry.sh 2 ./mach test-ref ....

We could also have this curl to some server with information on the
intermittent; so that we can keep track of these separately. It would also be
nice to have crowbot report them in chat (@jdm, is this possible?) and have
something comment on GH with a cross-reference.

This isn't too different from what we do already, we mostly just file or link to
an intermittent hit retry, and move on.

r? @larsbergstrom

cc @jack @edunham

Review on Reviewable

@Manishearth
Copy link
Member Author

Manishearth commented Feb 8, 2016

(Of course, we should only run this on test-ref. Most PRs don't change things that affect test-ref; and test-ref is where all the intermittents are from)

@jdm
Copy link
Member

jdm commented Feb 8, 2016

test-ref doesn't exist. test-wpt and test-css are both sources of intermittent failures...

@Manishearth
Copy link
Member Author

Manishearth commented Feb 8, 2016

Ugh, I meant test-css, but yeah, wpt has reftests too. Not sure if we should retry wpt since plenty of legit failures come from it too.

@larsbergstrom
Copy link
Contributor

larsbergstrom commented Feb 8, 2016

If you're mainly concerned about test-css, I'd almost be more interested in running specific intermittent failures with non-incremental layout instead (assuming that is, indeed, the source of our bugs).

I guess I'm personally just really afraid of auto-retry because it starts with this, then goes to "retry just the failed test," and then shortly people start to forget that it's even there and just have a general sense that tests are flaky and/or "only run on the builders."

I'm mainly citing from past life experiences, and admittedly the Visual Studio tests drove the UI via accessibility automation, which is significantly more challenging to get reproducible than our wpt/css tests, so I might be overly worried.

@larsbergstrom
Copy link
Contributor

larsbergstrom commented Feb 9, 2016

@bors-servo r+

I'll go ahead and land this so that we can test this out and/or bikeshed our opinions on retry over in the saltfs repo where we'd be making the concrete changes :-)

@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Feb 9, 2016

📌 Commit 26a6ed5 has been approved by larsbergstrom

@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Feb 9, 2016

Testing commit 26a6ed5 with merge 8ce3d0f...

bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 9, 2016
Add CI script to retry builds

We can then run test-ref as `retry.sh 2 ./mach test-ref ....`

We could also have this curl to some server with information on the
intermittent; so that we can keep track of these separately. It would also be
nice to have crowbot report them in chat (@jdm, is this possible?) and have
something comment on GH with a cross-reference.

This isn't too different from what we do already, we mostly just file or link to
an intermittent hit retry, and move on.

r? @larsbergstrom

cc @jack @edunham

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
[<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="40" alt="Review on Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/9572)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@bors-servo
Copy link
Contributor

bors-servo commented Feb 9, 2016

@bors-servo bors-servo merged commit 26a6ed5 into servo:master Feb 9, 2016
2 checks passed
2 checks passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
homu Test successful
Details
bors-servo added a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2016
Clean up CI bash scripts

Also reverts #9572.

<!-- Reviewable:start -->
---
This change is [<img src="https://reviewable.io/review_button.svg" height="35" align="absmiddle" alt="Reviewable"/>](https://reviewable.io/reviews/servo/servo/10948)
<!-- Reviewable:end -->
@Manishearth Manishearth deleted the Manishearth:retry-n branch May 7, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.