As a stop-gap measure, can we all run the debug build on our local machine 
before opening a PR? Harshad makes a good point about getting into a mode where 
the DEBUG ASSERTS are never checked. 

I’d also suggest that we make a note of this in each PR description so the 
reviewer does not have to ask. 

Comments? 

On 11/17/16, 10:24 AM, "Harshad Deshmukh" <hars...@cs.wisc.edu> wrote:

    One option to lower the compilation time is to reduce the template code 
    explosion. Based on the discussion on the PR: 
    https://github.com/apache/incubator-quickstep/pull/129 it seems that 
    removal of a storage format is on the cards. I hope it helps in avoiding 
    the Travis timeout.
    
    
    On 11/16/2016 10:08 PM, Harshad Deshmukh wrote:
    > Hi Zuyu,
    >
    > Completely disabling the debug builds is not ideal, in my opinion. A 
    > lot of DEBUG ASSERT statements, which are potentially quite useful in 
    > debugging issues, only fire up in debug builds. I see from some of the 
    > previous pull requests that not all debug configuration run for 50+ 
    > minutes. A reasonable trade-off could be to disable only those debug 
    > builds that run for 50+ minutes.
    >
    > In any case, it is worthwhile to bring down the build time. It is also 
    > better from developer productivity point of view. Any 
    > efforts/suggestion in this regard are highly welcome.
    >
    >
    > On 11/16/2016 09:56 PM, Tony wrote:
    >> Hi,
    >>
    >> I would like to discuss how to avoid the Travis CI timeout issue in both
    >> the master branch and the PRs.
    >>
    >> The problem is that now Travis CI precisely kills all jobs running 
    >> for 50
    >> minutes, but unfortunately two GCC debug builds run about 1 hour.
    >>
    >> I would suggest that the Travis CI only tests for the release builds so
    >> that we won't have such issue, as shown in the following PR.
    >>
    >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-quickstep/pull/135
    >>
    >> Any comments?
    >>
    >> Cheers,
    >> Zuyu
    >>
    >
    
    -- 
    Thanks,
    Harshad
    
    


Reply via email to