Are we currently on a free plan? If we are, probably the unlimited build 
minutes would help

Thanks,
Qing

On 10/1/18, 6:08 PM, "kellen sunderland" <kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:

    Does the global time out change for paid plans?  I looked into it briefly
    but didn't see anything that would indicate it does.
    
    On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 2:25 AM Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com>
    wrote:
    
    > I think there's two approaches that we can take to mitigate the build &
    > test time problem, in one hand use a paid travis CI plan, in other improve
    > the unit tests in suites and only run a core set of tests, as we should do
    > on devices, but on this case we reduce coverage.
    >
    > https://travis-ci.com/plans
    >
    > Pedro.
    >
    > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:53 PM YiZhi Liu <eazhi....@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > > This makes sense. Thanks
    > >
    > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:36 PM kellen sunderland <
    > > kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Hey Zhennan, yes this is the exact problem, and I agree with your
    > points
    > > > completely.  This is why when we first added Travis we attempted to
    > > > communicate that it would be informational only, and that we'd need to
    > > > iterate on the config before it would be a test that people should
    > > consider
    > > > 'required'.  Apologies, we should have been more straightforward about
    > > > those tradeoffs.  The strong point in favour of adding Travis in
    > > > informational mode was that we had a serious MacOS specific bug that 
we
    > > > wanted to verify was fixed.
    > > >
    > > > The good news is I've opened a PR which I hope will speed up these
    > builds
    > > > to the point that they won't rely on caching.  Once it is merged it
    > would
    > > > be very helpful if you could rebase on this PR and test to ensure that
    > > > large changes no longer hit the global timeout without cache.
    > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12706
    > > >
    > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2018 at 2:48 AM Qin, Zhennan <zhennan....@intel.com>
    > > > wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > Hi YiZhi and Kellen,
    > > > >
    > > > > From my point of view, travis should be able to get passed from a
    > > scratch
    > > > > build. Pending result on ccache hit/miss is not a good idea. For 
this
    > > PR,
    > > > > as it changed many header file, lots of files need be recompiled,
    > just
    > > > like
    > > > > a scratch build. I think that's the reason that travis timeout. This
    > > > should
    > > > > be fixed before enabling travis, as it will block any change to 
those
    > > > base
    > > > > header file. Again, it's not a special case with this PR only, you
    > can
    > > > find
    > > > > same problem on other PRs:
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > 
https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-mxnet/builds/433172088?utm_source=github_status&utm_medium=notification
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > >
    > 
https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-mxnet/builds/434404305?utm_source=github_status&utm_medium=notification
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > Thanks,
    > > > > Zhennan
    > > > >
    > > > > -----Original Message-----
    > > > > From: YiZhi Liu [mailto:eazhi....@gmail.com]
    > > > > Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2018 5:15 AM
    > > > > To: eazhi....@gmail.com
    > > > > Cc: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
    > > > > Subject: Re: Time out for Travis CI
    > > > >
    > > > > while other PRs are all good.
    > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 2:13 PM YiZhi Liu <eazhi....@gmail.com>
    > wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Honestly I don't know yet. I can help to investigate. Just given
    > the
    > > > > > evidence that, travis timeout every time it gets re-triggered - 2
    > > > > > times at least. Correct me if I'm wrong @ Zhennan On Sat, Sep 29,
    > > 2018
    > > > > > at 1:54 PM kellen sunderland <kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Reading over the PR I don't see what aspects would cause extra
    > > > > > > runtime YiZhi, could you point them out?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 8:46 PM YiZhi Liu <eazhi....@gmail.com>
    > > > wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Kellen, I think this PR introduces extra runtime in CI, thus
    > > > > > > > causes the timeout. Which means, once merged, every PR later
    > will
    > > > > > > > see same timeout in travis.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > So shall we modify the changes to decrease the test running
    > time?
    > > > > > > > or just disable the Travis CI?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 9:17 PM Qin, Zhennan
    > > > > > > > <zhennan....@intel.com>
    > > > > > > > wrote:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Hi Kellen,
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Thanks for your explanation. Do you have a time plan to 
solve
    > > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > timeout issue? Rebasing can't work for my case. Or shall we 
run
    > > it
    > > > > > > > silently to disallow it voting X for overall CI result? 
Because
    > > > > > > > most developers are used to ignore the PRs with 'X'.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Thanks,
    > > > > > > > > Zhennan
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
    > > > > > > > > From: kellen sunderland [mailto:kellen.sunderl...@gmail.com]
    > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 10:38 PM
    > > > > > > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org
    > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Time out for Travis CI
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Hey Zhennan, you're safe to ignore Travis failures for now.
    > > > > > > > > They're
    > > > > > > > just informational.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > The reason you sometimes see quick builds and sometimes see
    > > slow
    > > > > > > > > builds
    > > > > > > > is that we're making use of ccache in between builds.  If your
    > PR
    > > > > > > > is similar to what's in master you should build very quickly,
    > if
    > > > > > > > not it's going to take a while and likely time out.  If you 
see
    > > > > > > > timeouts rebasing may speed things up.  Unfortunately the
    > > timeouts
    > > > > > > > are global and we're not able to increase them.  I'm hoping
    > that
    > > > > > > > adding artifact caching will speed up future builds to the
    > point
    > > > > > > > that test runs and builds can be executed in under the global
    > > limit
    > > > > (which is ~50 minutes).
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > -Kellen
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 4:05 PM Qin, Zhennan
    > > > > > > > > <zhennan....@intel.com>
    > > > > > > > wrote:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Hi MXNet devs,
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > I'm struggled with new Travis CI for a while, it always 
run
    > > > > > > > > > time out for this PR:
    > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/12530
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Most of the time, Jenkins CI can pass, while Travis can't
    > be
    > > > > > > > > > finished within 50 minutes. For this PR, it shouldn't
    > affect
    > > > > > > > > > much on the build time or unit test time. Also, I saw 
other
    > > PR
    > > > > has same problem, eg.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-mxnet/builds/433172088?
    > > > > > > > > > utm_sour ce=github_status&utm_medium=notification
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-mxnet/builds/434404305?
    > > > > > > > > > utm_sour ce=github_status&utm_medium=notification
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > According to the time stamp from Travis, all passed PR are
    > > > > > > > > > within small code change, and can complete `make -j2`
    > within
    > > > > > > > > > 25s. But for timeout case, 'make -j2' will need about
    > 1600s.
    > > > > > > > > > Does Travis do incremental build for each test? Shall we
    > > > > > > > > > increase time limit for large PR? Can we add more time
    > stamp
    > > > > > > > > > for build and unites stage to
    > > > > > > > help understand what's going on there?
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance,
    > > > > > > > > > Zhennan
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > --
    > > > > > > > Yizhi Liu
    > > > > > > > DMLC member
    > > > > > > > Amazon Web Services
    > > > > > > > Vancouver, Canada
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > --
    > > > > > Yizhi Liu
    > > > > > DMLC member
    > > > > > Amazon Web Services
    > > > > > Vancouver, Canada
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > --
    > > > > Yizhi Liu
    > > > > DMLC member
    > > > > Amazon Web Services
    > > > > Vancouver, Canada
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > --
    > > Yizhi Liu
    > > DMLC member
    > > Amazon Web Services
    > > Vancouver, Canada
    > >
    >
    

Reply via email to