Thanks for your reply. I understand your concern about not having a clean host for the build process. However there are a couple of arguments for me using an instance instead of an ami: - firing up a new ami is quite more time consuming then booting an already existing instance. - when having large repositories, pull times of repositories can be time consuming when initial pull is performed.
Stefan sent from mobile. On Aug 3, 2012 10:16 PM, "R. Tyler Croy" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Tisch wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I have been looking at the jenkins ec2 plugin for jenkins. I've read the > > documentation for the plugin on the plugin page. I can't find a way to > set > > an instance-ID > > (i-88e6xxx) instead of an AMI-ID to start slaves. I've seen the option to > > stop a slave instead of terminating it. So I'm searching for a way to > start > > that stopped slave up again instead of launching another AMI. > > > > This would save the state of the last compilation on the slave and would > > therefore save CMS pulling times and eventually compilation times. > > > > So I was wondering if one could provide an instance-ID instead of an > AMI-ID > > to launch > > for the ec2 plugin. > > > I'm not sure if what you want is possible, or even a good idea. The > benefit of > the plugin spinning up a machine from an AMI is that you then have a clean > host, using a running instance would add extra complexity IMO. > > > - R. Tyler Croy > -------------------------------------- > Code: http://github.com/rtyler > Chatter: http://twitter.com/agentdero > [email protected] >
