- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork926
chore: use a smaller runner for e2e test#15034
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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
Ok. The e2e test is failing. Could it be because#14979 hasn't landed yet? |
mtojek left a comment• edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
--max-workers=1
probably to reduce flakiness
Yes, at one point we had trouble running multiple tests in parallel because the machine was overloaded and started timing out. I think we could experiment to see if the situation has improved?
EDIT:
BTW if we want to increase parallelization level, we need to remember that this may affect API rate limit 👍
Thank you for the context@mtojek. We can investigate parallelism separately, my intention for this change now is to reduce CI compute cost. Also could you or someone from the team have a look why |
Using a 4 core 16GB runner solves the issue. This is interesting for me and I would like to kno why. |
20b3f8f intomainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
We run our e2e-tests on a 16-core machine with
--max-workers=1Using a standard runner with 2 cores, the machine runs the tests in the same amount of time while reducing the cost 8 times.