On 14.03.2013 21:50, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Martin Ba <[email protected]> wrote:
I'd say this is not intended:
I have a node that has "Leave this machine for tied jobs only" set.
It started to run a Job that certainly did not explicitly set this node.
However, this Job had "Restrict where this project can be run" set to:
!master
So, yes, this expression includes this node, but it certainly is unexpected!
Should this be fixed? I'm running Jenkins 1.420
Why wouldn't you expect a job to run on a node that matches the label
where you told it to run? That sounds exactly like expect behavior -
and that is exactly how you get those 'tied jobs'.
I completely understand this implementation-wise.
But "tying" a job to a certain node doesn't really sound like what happened.
We have:
* Node B says: "Leave this machine for tied jobs"
* Job X says: I don't care where I'm run, just not on master (`!master`)
* Job Y says: Only run this job on Nodes A and B (`A && B` for example)
I think it's a little bit surprising that both X and Y will run on Node
B, don't you think?
The PROBLEM here is also that this restricts inserting "test-nodes" into
a Jenkins instance that only run a very limited set of jobs.
As soon as any other job has a blanket (!master) set, it'll get run on
these test nodes too.
I guess one workaround could be (haven't tried yet) to add a dummy label
to all nodes so that restrictions could be phrased as `dummmy && !master`)
cheers,
Martin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins
Users" 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/groups/opt_out.
