Feature #8072

Set up a second Jenkins slave to build ISO images

Added by intrigeri 2014-10-11 11:49:31 . Updated 2015-09-10 12:21:15 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Continuous Integration
Target version:
Start date:
2014-10-11
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
Sysadmin
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

Quite often, ISO builds triggered by Jenkins are queuing up. Let’s add a 2nd ISO builder, and allocate 6 vcpus to each builder. (Probably remove one of the debomatic’s vCPUs along the way.)

Subtasks

Related issues

Related to Tails - Bug #10999: Parallelize our ISO building workload on more builders Resolved 2016-01-26
Blocks Tails - Feature #6196: Build all active branches Resolved 2013-08-07 2015-07-15

History

#1 Updated by intrigeri 2014-10-27 22:23:53

  • related to Feature #7106: Refactor Puppet code for the Jenkins slave on builder.lizard added

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2014-10-27 22:26:03

  • related to deleted (Feature #7106: Refactor Puppet code for the Jenkins slave on builder.lizard)

#3 Updated by intrigeri 2014-10-27 22:26:13

  • blocked by Feature #7106: Refactor Puppet code for the Jenkins slave on builder.lizard added

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2014-10-27 22:27:06

I’ve had a look, and this would simply be too ugly to do before Feature #7106 is fixed.

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2014-12-06 10:30:09

  • blocks deleted (Feature #7106: Refactor Puppet code for the Jenkins slave on builder.lizard)

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2014-12-06 10:30:36

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
  • % Done changed from 0 to 10

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2014-12-06 10:31:31

#9 Updated by intrigeri 2014-12-06 10:31:50

  • Target version set to Sustainability_M1

Blocks a 2.0 goal, hence flagging for 2.0 too.

#10 Updated by bertagaz 2014-12-09 18:56:14

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)

Meet ‘isobuilder2’, carbon copy of ‘builder’ (who has been renamed to ‘isobuilder1’).

Been created and put in production yesterday. Hopefully it will help for future drafts of our infrastructure hardware, but so far no big news, each new isobuilder mostly consume CPU time.

#11 Updated by bertagaz 2014-12-09 18:56:33

  • % Done changed from 10 to 100

#12 Updated by sajolida 2015-09-10 12:21:15

  • Target version deleted (Sustainability_M1)

#13 Updated by intrigeri 2016-01-26 16:26:25

  • related to Bug #10999: Parallelize our ISO building workload on more builders added