On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 18/11/2008, at 4:49 PM, Marica Tan wrote: > > Additional proposal for distributed builds >> >> 1. Need to have a separate builder for distributed and non-distributed >> builds >> - non-distributed builds: group level update then build project one by >> one. >> - distributed builds: update and build project one by one. >> > > I don't quite understand this... since the location is decided by the build > definition wouldn't they just be distributed together? > I was actually thinking here that each project will be distributed to different agents. But now that I think about it, it's much easier if a multi-module projects will be distributed together. I think we shouldn't tie up the build agents with the build definition. If we still have the build agent in the build environment, then it's a one to one relationship; a project group will always be distributed to the same build agent. IMO, assign any available build agent to a project. So that if one is unavailable there still other agents where the project can be distributed to. So if a project group has a multi-module projects with/without interdependency and another non multi-module project, then the multi-module projects will be distributed together while the other project will be distributed to another agent. > > >> >> 2. Continuum server is considered as the local build agent. It will be >> included when looking for an available build agent. >> > > Makes sense. I agree with Emmanuel's comment here to try and use the same > code. > > >> >> 3. Central remote repository >> - for local build agent >> a. add remote repository to settings.xml >> - for remote build agents >> a. add remote repository to settings.xml > > this is in the agent machine > >> b. M1 or M2 projects: deploy artifacts recently installed in the local >> repo to the remote repo. >> c. ANT or SHELL projects: don't know yet how to deploy artifacts for >> these type of projects. so maybe limit the distributed builds for M1 >> and/or >> M2 projects only? >> > > I'm not quite sure what needs to change for a distributed build here... > it's just the same configuration on multiple machines, right? > What do you mean? > > >> >> 4. Remote build agents will not use any database. All information will be >> stored in a configuration file. Continuum server (master agnet) system >> administrator's credentials will be stored in the settings.xml as well. >> > > This is the ideal architecture IMO (which I proposed some months back) and > makes the build agents smaller, but to get this working is it necessary? I > agree with Emmanuel's comment here to try and use the same code again. > > > Cheers, > Brett > > -- > Brett Porter > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ > > Thanks, -- Marica
