4 ms·

I literally set up some GitHub actions today for the first time in my life, I was really pumped about getting into the CI/CD game with my latest open repository

I literally set up some GitHub actions today for the first time in my life, I was really pumped about getting into the CI/CD game with my latest open repository. A couple of hours ago everything was going great, running a workflow needed maybe 40 seconds max. Now, they are not running at all. That all happened while I was thinkering with the yaml workflow file, so the disruption of the service made me believe that it was me who broke something :P it's been a nice first experience with CI/CD though, never going back to building my self. Check my GitHub repo (see my bio) to see it's true haha

bombcar 5y ago
Think of the poor grandma yesterday who was finally convinced to get a Facebook account to see the grandkids and right as she hits "create account" Facebook goes down worldwide. No force on earth will convince her she didn't do it.
- frupert52 5y ago
  Then the next day she finally gets around to setting up her GitHub actions and this happens. Now gran really thinks something is up
  - pixl97 5y ago
    So yea, hopefully she doesn't buy a plane ticket for the first flight of her life tomorrow.
danuker 5y ago
> running a workflow needed maybe 40 seconds max If your test suite takes 40 seconds, is it not quicker and easier to run locally than the overhead of another git commit to get feedback?
- jffry 5y ago
  Automating the tests so that they run against 100% of commits is great. Humans are fallible and might not remember to always run the tests locally. If I'm making a change and I want feedback from the test suite, of course I'd run it locally.
- manquer 5y ago
  On a recent project I am working on tests typically take 60 seconds to run. This is jest with testing-library, with 2000 tests fairly typical setup. On CI it takes about 5 minutes to run. My laptop which while not top of the line is fairly well powered (8core 32 gb) the fan starts spinning and slows down a bit whenever I run the suite. I find both these times incredibly distracting and inefficient. It breaks my concentration, faster feedback would be really nice.
  - Raed667 5y ago
    jest has known issues with CI jobs and parallel running. You might want to look into parallelization and the number of workers allocated.
    - manquer 5y ago
      In CI (Github Actions) , as generally is recommended I have limited with max-workers=1. With a single worker 5 min doesn't sound it unreasonably long for 2,000 tests? Most CI runners are going to only give lower performance single core vCPU in their runtime so it doesn't seem too bad time taken for this type of workload. On my laptop I run 6 tests in parallel. It runs in 60ish seconds however the balance is how much cores I can spare for the workers while still being able to do something else. The challenge is if you switch to another task you don't come back always after the minute and it takes some time to review and commit, or some tests failed now you are fixing those and also working on other items. Both tasks go poorly, because after each run you want to go back to other task so sometimes you fix one thing and that breaks something else in the next run, so you keep doing few runs and that new task is going poorly because you are losing focus constantly, the Or eventually you end up with work that is really few completely different commits getting actually pushed as one big item, If you like frequent atomic commits this is just breaks your flow all the time. P.S. the pet peeve: when the laptop fans starts spinning hard to handle the work, it feels like the same frustration that I feel when I am out of shape and start huffing and puffing in a simple 2k run.

bombcar 5y ago

Think of the poor grandma yesterday who was finally convinced to get a Facebook account to see the grandkids and right as she hits "create account" Facebook goes down worldwide. No force on earth will convince her she didn't do it.

frupert52 5y ago
Then the next day she finally gets around to setting up her GitHub actions and this happens. Now gran really thinks something is up
- pixl97 5y ago
  So yea, hopefully she doesn't buy a plane ticket for the first flight of her life tomorrow.

danuker 5y ago

> running a workflow needed maybe 40 seconds max If your test suite takes 40 seconds, is it not quicker and easier to run locally than the overhead of another git commit to get feedback?

jffry 5y ago
Automating the tests so that they run against 100% of commits is great. Humans are fallible and might not remember to always run the tests locally. If I'm making a change and I want feedback from the test suite, of course I'd run it locally.
manquer 5y ago
On a recent project I am working on tests typically take 60 seconds to run. This is jest with testing-library, with 2000 tests fairly typical setup. On CI it takes about 5 minutes to run. My laptop which while not top of the line is fairly well powered (8core 32 gb) the fan starts spinning and slows down a bit whenever I run the suite. I find both these times incredibly distracting and inefficient. It breaks my concentration, faster feedback would be really nice.
- Raed667 5y ago
  jest has known issues with CI jobs and parallel running. You might want to look into parallelization and the number of workers allocated.
  - manquer 5y ago
    In CI (Github Actions) , as generally is recommended I have limited with max-workers=1. With a single worker 5 min doesn't sound it unreasonably long for 2,000 tests? Most CI runners are going to only give lower performance single core vCPU in their runtime so it doesn't seem too bad time taken for this type of workload. On my laptop I run 6 tests in parallel. It runs in 60ish seconds however the balance is how much cores I can spare for the workers while still being able to do something else. The challenge is if you switch to another task you don't come back always after the minute and it takes some time to review and commit, or some tests failed now you are fixing those and also working on other items. Both tasks go poorly, because after each run you want to go back to other task so sometimes you fix one thing and that breaks something else in the next run, so you keep doing few runs and that new task is going poorly because you are losing focus constantly, the Or eventually you end up with work that is really few completely different commits getting actually pushed as one big item, If you like frequent atomic commits this is just breaks your flow all the time. P.S. the pet peeve: when the laptop fans starts spinning hard to handle the work, it feels like the same frustration that I feel when I am out of shape and start huffing and puffing in a simple 2k run.