On 9.5.2014 00:47, Tomas Vondra wrote: > On 8.5.2014 23:48, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> On 05/08/2014 05:21 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> Andrew Dunstan wrote: >>> >>>> I really don't get what your objection to the setup is. And no, I >>>> don't want them to run concurrently, I'd rather spread out the >>>> cycles. >>> I wasn't objecting, merely an observation. Note that Tomas >>> mentioned he's okay with running 4 builds at once. My main point >>> here, really, is that having a larger number of animals shouldn't >>> be an impediment for a more complex permutation of configurations, >>> if he's okay with doing that. I assume you wouldn't object to my >>> approving four extra animals running on the same machine, if Tomas >>> wants to go for that. > > So, if I get this right, the proposal is to have 7 animals: > > > 1) all branches/locales, frequent builds (every few hours) > magpie - gcc > fulmar - icc > treepie - clang > > 2) single branch/locale, CLOBBER, built once a week > magpie2 - gcc > fulmar2 - icc > treepie - clang > > 3) single branch/locale, recursive CLOBBER, built once a month > > > I don't particularly mind the number of animals, although I was shooting > for lower number. > > The only question is - should we use 3 animals for the recursive CLOBBER > too? I mean, one for each compiler?
OK. I've switched the three original animals (magpie, fulmar, treepie) back to the original configuration (no clobber, all branches, multiple locales). And I've requested 6 more animals - two for each compiler. One set for tests with basic CLOBBER, one set for recursive CLOBBER. Each group will run in a separate VM, in a round-robin manner. regards Tomas -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
