Skip to content

CI: bump linuxkit #34

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

CI: bump linuxkit #34

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ijc
Copy link
Contributor

@ijc ijc commented Dec 18, 2017

With linuxkit/linuxkit#2811 merged update to a newer linuxkit tool which consumes far less RAM (which should reduce/remove the occasional spurious we see here today due to the process getting OOM killed) and switch to building ISO images. Currently these are put into the workspace but not yet published as artefacts, need to think about the latter since they are quite large.

@ijc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ijc commented Dec 18, 2017

Comparing latest master CI to this PR the image build seems to have gone from ~2.5 mins for cri images and to ~11 mins for cri images (split ~8 mins for build and ~3 for adding to workspace) and ~20 mins (~13build + ~3 workspace) for docker ones, which is quite a slow down. I'm going to try instrumenting a bit.

Adding to the workspace seems pointless just now since nothing consumes it but one day I hope to publish and/or do a test boot which would make it useful.

@ijc ijc force-pushed the ci-build-iso-images branch from 87dd1ec to 95002f0 Compare December 18, 2017 15:17
@ijc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ijc commented Dec 18, 2017

Breakdown from https://circleci.com/workflow-run/d7b2de57-6f95-41f3-9a7b-dce9e6980886:

Runtime Network Import pkgs tar iso-bios iso-efi Builds (total) Save Job total
cri-containerd bridge 0:16 1:25 3:32 4:00 8:59 1:57 11:55
cri-containerd weave 0:07 1:29 3:34 3:33 8:37 2:20 11:38
docker bridge 0:20 2:31 7:17 6:53 16:42 4:15 22:30
docker weave 0:23 1:48 6:21 6:24 14:34 3:54 19:53

(totals aren't exact, there are other steps but they should be pretty similar).

Seems like the right thing to do is to go back to just building tar balls (but with the newer version of the tool) and consider what else we might need to build when we have a way to boot something. IOW rewind this PR back to just the first commit.

@ijc ijc force-pushed the ci-build-iso-images branch from 46cb45f to 785fd94 Compare December 18, 2017 16:25
This massively reduces the amount of memory required to build an image,
avoiding occasional spurious failures.

Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <[email protected]>
@ijc ijc force-pushed the ci-build-iso-images branch from 785fd94 to b429711 Compare December 19, 2017 11:15
@ijc ijc changed the title CI: bump linuxkit and build iso images CI: bump linuxkit Dec 19, 2017
@ijc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ijc commented Dec 19, 2017

Backed out to just the linuxkit binary bump, should stop the occasional spurious CI failures.

@ijc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ijc commented Jan 4, 2018

Since the linuxkit binary likely needs updating for stuff merged over xmas I'm going to do a new PR which just does the linuxkit binary bump.

@ijc ijc closed this Jan 4, 2018
@ijc ijc deleted the ci-build-iso-images branch January 4, 2018 16:17
ijc pushed a commit to ijc/linuxkit-kubernetes that referenced this pull request Jan 4, 2018
This massively reduces the amount of memory required to build an image,
avoiding occasional spurious failures.

Since the reason not to build ISOs now is speed (see linuxkit#34) update the comment.

Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants