|
||||||||
|
This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira |
||||||||
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Issues" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Hi Daniel,
I'm afraid that doesn't work. The way the Jenkins core code works any custom workspace is treated as an absolute path so in the case of concurrent builds they would all end up overwriting each other. If you use EXECUTOR_NUMBER in the custom workspace then you run into the problem in my original description above.
I've fixed this myself and created a pull request: https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkins/pull/1347
My fix means that you can now specify "${WORKSPACE}_${Branch}" as in my original description above. If there are any concurrent builds then they will be named "${WORKSPACE}_${Branch}@N" where '@' is the separator and N is the concurrent build index - not this is not the same as using the EXECUTOR_NUMBER, i.e. the second concurrent build (i.e. N=2) could be running on executor number 4 (if you have 4 or more executors). If the number of concurrent builds is restricted to say 2 then only 2 workspaces will be created, whereas if using EXECUTOR_NUMBER then up to the number of executors worth of workspaces could be created. As I said in the description our workspaces are very large and SSD space is limited so we need to restrict the number of these, particularly as we have multiple branches as well.
If this goes into the master build I'll resolve this issue.