Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals?
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140509151821.GJ6018@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals? (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>) |
Ответы |
Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals?
Re: Sending out a request for more buildfarm animals? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tomas Vondra wrote: > So, if I get this right, the proposal is to have 7 animals: It's your machine, so you decide what you want. I'm only throwing out some ideas. > 1) all branches/locales, frequent builds (every few hours) > magpie - gcc > fulmar - icc > treepie - clang > > 2) single branch/locale, CLOBBER, built once a week > magpie2 - gcc > fulmar2 - icc > treepie - clang > > 3) single branch/locale, recursive CLOBBER, built once a month Check. Not those "2" names though. > I don't particularly mind the number of animals, although I was shooting > for lower number. Consider that if the recursive clobber fails, we don't want that failure to appear "diluted" among many successes of runs using the same animal with non-recursive clobber. > The only question is - should we use 3 animals for the recursive CLOBBER > too? I mean, one for each compiler? I guess it depends how likely we think that a different compiler will change the behavior of the shared invalidation queue. Somebody else would have to answer that. If not, then clearly we need only 5 animals. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: