Skip to content

feat(ci): Split Java Gradle CI in many jobs to reduce execution time #1897

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

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jun 18, 2025

Conversation

adutra
Copy link
Contributor

@adutra adutra commented Jun 13, 2025

This is a simple attempt to reduce the CI execution time for pull requests. Instead of executing all tests in the same job, it parallelizes the tests in 4 jobs:

  • Code style & publishing checks
  • Unit tests
  • Quarkus tests
  • Integration tests

This could certainly be improved further, but I observed a total execution time around 10 minutes instead of 20 minutes before (at the cost of more compute power, of course).

steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@11bd71901bbe5b1630ceea73d27597364c9af683 # v4
- name: Set up JDK 21
- name: Set up JDK 23
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i think the ci before runs whole check, build, and tests on JDK 21 because Polaris is currently guarantee the compatibility with java 21, and then we are only doing selected check with java 23.
If we just update the JDK version to 23, that means we will loose the test coverage for 21, right? if the intension of this PR is to just split the ci into multiple jobs, can we keep the java 21 setup?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh sorry that wasn't my intention. I can set the "Style check" job to 21, would that be enough? If not, I'm afraid we'd need a matrix job.

Also, tbh we should upgrade 23 to 24 but I don't want to introduce any unwanted changes in this PR.

Copy link
Contributor

@gh-yzou gh-yzou Jun 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The original CI have the following coverage for 21

run: ./gradlew --continue check

which I believe runs all tests, and on 23 it only does compilation and integration tests. However, with the current change, it seems we are doing full test coverage with java 23, but only style check with 21. Can we still retain the full test coverage with 21, limited test with 23 like before ? so that this is a pure refactoring task

If we also want to introduce full coverage with other jdk version like 23, we can do in follow up PR to introduce a test matrix

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well, that will limit the amount of parallelism to just 2 jobs, but if that's what you want, OK.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I went back to 3 jobs, 2 with 21 and 1 with 23, because 2 jobs only was too slow.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All jobs on 21 now, as per @snazy suggestion.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

sorry, for the confusion. i don't really mean still run ./gradlew --continue check. what i mean is when we are breaking it into jobs, make sure the tasks runs on 21 still provides the fully test coverage, include unit test, initTest, style check, publishToMaven etc. For 23 it can remain just have one job with coverage for integration test.

However, it seems we are now removing the coverage on 23 now because 23 is going to be end of like, which i think should be fine.

If we want to further breakdown the job runs with 21 to more jobs, i am also fine with that.

permissions:
contents: read
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@11bd71901bbe5b1630ceea73d27597364c9af683 # v4
- name: Set up JDK 23
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

23 is EOL - and 24 won't work. Probably better to go back to 21?


unit-tests:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Need to update .asf.yaml as well

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we're going to have a problem to merge this PR because the build job is still marked as required, but it doesn't exist anymore.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I kept the old build job around to make it possible to merge this PR. We'd need to remove that job in a separate PR.

gh-yzou
gh-yzou previously approved these changes Jun 17, 2025
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from PRs In Progress to Ready to merge in Basic Kanban Board Jun 17, 2025
- name: Run Quarkus tests
run: |
./gradlew \
:polaris-quarkus-service:test \
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do we isolate quarkus test, but not intTest?

Copy link
Contributor

@dimas-b dimas-b Jun 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd assume intTest takes the longest time in general, so it might be preferable to break it out if the goal is to reduce CI time 🤔

Copy link
Contributor Author

@adutra adutra Jun 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do we isolate quarkus test, but not intTest?

Because these two jobs are roughly taking 8 minutes each now, so that sounded like a balanced choice. In fact, the intTest job is not necessarily the longest the job currently 🤷‍♂️

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also: the job is named "Quarkus tests" for simplicitly but it actually runs all the tests in polaris-runtime-service and polaris-admin.

We could isolate only the tests annotated with @QuarkusTest or QuarkusMainTest but that's not a trivial thing to do with Gradle, so I went for simplicity. We can revisit that later if necessary.

dimas-b
dimas-b previously approved these changes Jun 17, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@dimas-b dimas-b left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM in general. Please consider my comments optional.

@snazy
Copy link
Member

snazy commented Jun 17, 2025

Just figured out that we should have another change to either this PR or a followup around Gradle caches.
Splitting up the Java CI into multiple parts "borks" the cached Gradle artifacts (cache stored from the last run on "main" wins). This results in unnecessary build effort and test runs. I'd be okay to live with that for a bit, but we should solve it.
NB: we have a mechanism for that in Nessie CI.

@adutra
Copy link
Contributor Author

adutra commented Jun 18, 2025

Splitting up the Java CI into multiple parts "borks" the cached Gradle artifacts (cache stored from the last run on "main" wins). This results in unnecessary build effort and test runs.

@snazy the caches seem to be working afaict; what makes you say they are "borked"?

@adutra adutra dismissed stale reviews from dimas-b and gh-yzou via feb5601 June 18, 2025 08:08
@snazy
Copy link
Member

snazy commented Jun 18, 2025

@snazy the caches seem to be working afaict; what makes you say they are "borked"?

"Last Gradle cache store" wins. The next job will read the state of that "last one". So you either have test, intTest or ... - but not a merged state of all. This is what Nessie CI does - merging the cache state of all jobs.

@adutra
Copy link
Contributor Author

adutra commented Jun 18, 2025

@snazy the caches seem to be working afaict; what makes you say they are "borked"?

"Last Gradle cache store" wins. The next job will read the state of that "last one". So you either have test, intTest or ... - but not a merged state of all. This is what Nessie CI does - merging the cache state of all jobs.

OK, I will tackle that in a follow-up since this one was approved already.

@adutra
Copy link
Contributor Author

adutra commented Jun 18, 2025

@snazy or @dimas-b do you mind re-approving please? I will look into cache improvements next.

@adutra adutra merged commit 5441bb6 into apache:main Jun 18, 2025
12 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Ready to merge to Done in Basic Kanban Board Jun 18, 2025
@eric-maynard
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @adutra, did this possibly break the tests? I notice that the new tests are stuck in a pending state and PRs can't be merged.

Screenshot 2025-06-18 at 11 29 51 AM

@adutra
Copy link
Contributor Author

adutra commented Jun 18, 2025

Hey @adutra, did this possibly break the tests? I notice that the new tests are stuck in a pending state and PRs can't be merged.

Screenshot 2025-06-18 at 11 29 51 AM

Yes, this was expected unfortunately. If you rebase the PR it should get unstuck.

adutra added a commit to adutra/polaris that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2025
Since apache#1897, the jobs in gradle.yaml changed and the "build" job was split into many smaller jobs. But since it was a required job, it couldn't be removed immediately.
adutra added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2025
Since #1897, the jobs in gradle.yaml changed and the "build" job was split into many smaller jobs. But since it was a required job, it couldn't be removed immediately.
@adutra adutra deleted the split-ci branch July 19, 2025 14:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants