Re: Draft release notes complete
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Draft release notes complete |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4FABE2CC.401@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Draft release notes complete (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Draft release notes complete
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/10/2012 11:24 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:49:51PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net> wrote: >>> >>> On 05/10/2012 01:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >>>> Bruce Momjian<bruce@momjian.us> writes: >>>>> The docs finally built 90 minutes after my commit, and the URL above is >>>>> now working. (Does it always take this long to update?) >>>> I believe the new implementation of that stuff is that the devel docs >>>> are built whenever the buildfarm member guaibasaurus runs for HEAD, >>>> which it seems to do on an hourly schedule. This is definitely not as >>>> fast-responding as Peter's former custom script, but I'm not sure if >>>> it's worth thinking of another way. >>>> >>> I don't see any reason it can't run more frequently, though. Currently a run >>> takes 15 minutes or so. We could reduce that by making it skip some steps, >>> and get it down to about 10 minutes. It would be perfectly reasonable to run >>> every 5 minutes (it won't schedule concurrent runs - if the lock file is >>> held by another run it exits gracefully). Of course, that's up to Magnus and >>> Stefan. >> If we can make it do *just* the docs, we can certainly run it a bit >> more often. But we don't want to make it run the full set of checks >> more or less continously, since the machine is shared with a number of >> other tasks... >> >> I don't think 5 minutes is anywhere near necessary even for the docs, >> but there is a lot of room between 5 minutes and 4 hours, so we can >> definitely shorten it. > Do you want me to just setup a build on my machine like we did before; > 5 minutes is no problem for me. > > I use the doc build to show patch submitters what their final work looks > like, and anything more than a few minutes delay makes that useless. > It's been done the current way for quite a few months now. If you're only noticing it now is it really such an inconvenience? Having said that, I'm not at all opposed to reducing the lag time. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: