Open Stack

Sean Dague wrote:
> I have a couple of ideas about things we should do based on what I've
> seen in the gate during this wedge.
> [...]

All good ideas.

I would add a couple of.. more aggressive suggestions to the mix:

= Parallel assume-1st-fail pipeline =

John Dickinson's suggestion. Assume first one fails and have a parallel
pipe proactively anticipating that case, switching over in case that
prediction verifies itself.

= Run multiple OR tests in parallel for the same change =

This one is more aggressive. The idea would be to run two sets of test
jobs for the same change. For a given job, if any of the two runs
succeed, consider it a PASS. Still track the failure as a data point to
find and fix non-deterministic bugs.

This would let non-deterministic bugs have less impact on the gate and
not be blocking anymore. Yes, it lets NEW non-deterministic bugs more
easily in, but at this point I would argue that the gate is blocking
more legitimate patches than preventing bad ones from coming in. This
would mostly be anticipating on what we do anyway in that case (reverify).


Both of those options are costly in terms of node consumption. That said
I think it doesn't really make sense to build a 100-long gate queue and
assigning resources to that, when we know for almost-certain there is no
way that 100th test will end up being significant. The gate queue could
be 25-50 deep and work the same. The changes at the top of the queue are
the ones that matter and which should be given extra resources and
parallel testing.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/attachments/20140121/b0c9e34b/attachment.pgp>