That does not sound expected or desired. Could you point me to which Chromium builders are responsible for so much data?
I suspect this is an artifact of new-run-webkit-tests or how the Chromium builders are set up. On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:12 AM, William Siegrist <[email protected]> wrote: > Right now, /results/ is served from the new storage and is receiving test > results data since a day or two ago. For anything older, you will get > redirected to /old-results/ which is on the old storage. This probably breaks > your code if you are trying to load /results/ and walk backwards in > revisions. We should probably look at adding some sort of map to the > /json/builders/ data instead. > > On a side note, Chromium test results account for 75% of the 700GB of result > data, SnowLeopard is 11%, then everyone else. I assume Chromium generating so > much more data than everyone else is expected and desired? > > -Bill > > > > > On Oct 18, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Eric Seidel wrote: > >> The most frequent consumer of the historical data is webkit-patch, >> which uses it to map from revisions to builds: >> http://trac.webkit.org/browser/trunk/WebKitTools/Scripts/webkitpy/common/net/buildbot.py#L109 >> >> It's used when we're walking back through revisions trying to find >> when the build broke, or when the user passes us a revision and >> expects us to know build information about such. >> >> It's possible we could move off that map with some re-design. >> >> >> One thing which would *hugely* speed up webkit-patch failure-reason >> (and sherriff-bot, and other commands which use the >> build_to_revision_map) is if we could make the results/ pages >> paginated. :) >> >> >> I would be nice to keep all the build data for forever. Even if after >> some date in the past its on a slower server. >> >> -eric >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:38 AM, William Siegrist <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On Oct 14, 2010, at 10:13 AM, William Siegrist wrote: >>> >>>> On Oct 14, 2010, at 9:27 AM, William Siegrist wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am in the process of moving buildbot onto faster storage which should >>>>> help with performance. However, during the move, performance will be even >>>>> worse due to the extra i/o. There will be a downtime period in the next >>>>> few days to do the final switchover, but I won't know when that will be >>>>> until the preliminary copying is done. I am trying not to kill the master >>>>> completely, but there have been some slave disconnects due to the load >>>>> already this morning. I'll let everyone know when the downtime will be >>>>> once I know. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The copying of data will take days at the rate we're going, and the server >>>> is exhibiting some strange memory paging in the process. I am going to >>>> reboot the server and try copying with the buildbot master down. The >>>> master will be down for about 15m, if I can't get the copy done in that >>>> time I will schedule a longer downtime at a better time. Sorry for the >>>> churn. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Most of build.webkit.org is now running on the newer/faster storage. >>> However, the results data[1] is hundreds of gigabytes, going back 6 months, >>> and the new storage is not big enough. Does anyone have any opinion on how >>> much data to keep in results? Does anyone ever look back more than a month >>> or two? For now, the results will still come up a slowly, but hopefully the >>> rest of buildbot is a little more responsive. We're still planning to move >>> all of webkit.org to better hardware soon, but we hit some delays in that >>> process. >>> >>> [1] http://build.webkit.org/results/ >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Bill >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> webkit-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev >>> > > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
