yetus-5 was just committed which does all of this (and more, of course). On Oct 6, 2015, at 2:35 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> >> On 5 Oct 2015, at 19:45, Colin McCabe <cmcc...@alumni.cmu.edu> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Steve Loughran <ste...@hortonworks.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> the jenkins machines are shared across multiple projects; cut the executors >>> to 1/node and then everyone's performance drops, including the time to >>> complete of all jenkins patches, which is one of the goals. >> >> Hi Steve, >> >> Just to be clear, the proposal wasn't to cut the executors to 1 per >> node, but to have multiple Docker containers per node (perhaps 3 or 4) >> and run each executor in an isolated container. At that point, >> whatever badness Maven does on the .m2 stops being a problem for >> concurrently running jobs. >> > > I'd missed that bit. Yes, something with a containerized ~//m2 repo gets the > isolation without playing with mvn version fixup > >> I guess I don't feel that strongly about this, but the additional >> complexity of the other solutions (like running a "find" command in >> .m2, or changing artifactID) seems like a disadvantage compared to >> just using multiple containers. And there may be other race >> conditions here that we're not aware of... like a TOCTOU between >> checking for a jar in .m2 and downloading it, for example. The >> Dockerized solution skips all those potential failure modes and >> complexity. >> >> cheers, >> Colin >> >
