On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 11:22:26PM +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
On Wed, 01 Jul 2020 17:46:23 +0200, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> * Is this only on x86_64 that you need this? Or all arches?
Sure we should have this on all arches but I haven't tested non-x86_64 yet.
There possibly may be also some memory problems even on x86_64 (it builds on
my machine w/64GB but Koji has only 16GB + big swap).
> * you're guessing you need 160GB? Is that pretty accurate?
$ du -shc `git ls-files` `cat sources |sed 's/^.*(\(.*\)).*$/\1/'`
chromium-83.0.4103.116-2/ BUILDROOT/
... ...
161G chromium-83.0.4103.116/
14G BUILDROOT/
176G total
> I can fix that and they would have ~300GB or so each, would that be enough?
It depends what other packages are being built on the same host, doesn't it?
Yes, somewhat. The vast majority of the time that is the empty set.
It's only when there's a mass build of something do all the builders
really fill up.
> in that case you could submit and cancel until you got a
buildhw-x86 ?
I am not Chromium maintainer (Tom 'spot' Callaway is). I am not even sure Spot
will accept this change (although then why not). I do not want to talk for
Spot if he likes to do the builds this way.
I have fixed the buildhw-x86 boxes, they all now have ~365GB now.
Sorry, I misunderstood you... I thought you were wanting to test a
scratch build that needed more space. You are proposing a change that
will make official chromium builds take that extra space always?
Our very fast a64 builders do not always have that amount of space, so
it would have to fall back to the aarch64 buildvm's in that arch.
> Anyhow, I'd suggest filing an infrastructure ticket with
your needs and
> we can see what we can come up with either short or long term for you.
I will file a ticket after Spot says his opinion (or not).
Sure.
kevin