Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ci/cd] Split Test pipeline according to runtime-benchmarks feature #48

Conversation

bkontur
Copy link
Contributor

@bkontur bkontur commented Sep 28, 2023

Summary

Based on original issue from @gilescope related to the monorepo:

Currently the tests have started to be run with the runtime-benchmarks feature enabled ( E.g. https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/blob/aabed6757e26e21ce06dd59946a17b72f349185e/.gitlab/pipeline/test.yml#L37 ). This was done so that the autogenerated tests that the benchmark macros create get run (but it seems that we already have a short-benchmark CI job... - do the additional tests give us anything extra? EDIT: the short-benchmarks only test 3 relay chains so not comprehensive enough).

However, this is inherently dangerous as not everything will be in a production like state when it is being tested.

For safety's sake we should be running without the runtime-benchmarks feature enabled. Assuming the CI system can take it, we should set up another job that runs the tests with the runtime-benchmarks feature enabled. (if we did not do this we would catch any problems later when the weights are rerun for the runtime release builds).

Proposed solution

Split test pipeline to the two pipelines:

  • one without runtime-benchmarks feature
  • one with runtime-benchmarks feature

@bkontur
Copy link
Contributor Author

bkontur commented Sep 28, 2023

bot help

@bkontur bkontur mentioned this pull request Oct 19, 2023
@gilescope
Copy link
Contributor

gilescope commented Dec 2, 2023 via email

@bkontur
Copy link
Contributor Author

bkontur commented Dec 2, 2023

I’m confused, pretty sure it was split into two already?

yes, it was, but only for polkadot-sdk repo, not for polkadot-fellows repo

@bkchr
Copy link
Contributor

bkchr commented Dec 7, 2023

/merge

@fellowship-merge-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Enabled auto-merge in Pull Request

Available commands
  • /merge: Enables auto-merge for Pull Request
  • /merge cancel: Cancels auto-merge for Pull Request
  • /merge help: Shows this menu

For more information see the documentation

@fellowship-merge-bot fellowship-merge-bot bot enabled auto-merge (squash) December 7, 2023 21:44
@fellowship-merge-bot fellowship-merge-bot bot merged commit 2b30243 into polkadot-fellows:main Dec 7, 2023
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants