Instead of doing this partial operation a number of times, assert (with
a comment, get a reference to the thing inside, and use that just once.
(This refactor was done twice, "just once" for each time.)
* Let tests themselves intentionally leak temp dir
By default Yath will clean up temporary files, so the result is the
same. But `--keep-dirs` can be passed to `yath test` telling Yath to
*not* clean them up instead. This is very useful for debugging.
* Update t/lib/HydraTestContext.pm
Co-authored-by: Cole Helbling <cole.e.helbling@outlook.com>
For the record, here is the Nix 2.19 version:
https://github.com/NixOS/nix/blob/2.19-maintenance/src/libstore/serve-protocol.cc,
which is what we would initially use.
It is a more complete version of what Hydra has today except for one
thing: it always unconditionally sets the start/stop times.
I think that is correct at the other end seems to unconditionally
measure them, but just to be extra careful, I reproduced the old
behavior of falling back on Hydra's own measurements if `startTime` is
0.
The only difference is that the fallback `stopTime` is now measured from
after the entire `BuildResult` is transferred over the wire, but I think
that should be negligible if it is measurable at all. (And remember,
this is fallback case I already suspect is dead code.)
- `nativeBuildInputs` vs `buildInputs`
- narrow down `with`s for clarity
- use `autoreconfHook` not `bootstrap` script
These sorts of changes have also been done in the Nix repo.
Since the default lengths in Crypt::Passphrase::Argon2 changed from 16
to 32 in in 0.009, some tests that expected the passphrase to be
unchanged started failing.
The previous implementation was O(N²lg(N)) due to sorting the full
runnables priority list once per runnable being scheduled. While not
confirmed, this is suspected to cause performance issues and
bottlenecking with the queue runner when the runnable list gets large
enough.
This commit changes the dispatcher to instead only sort runnables per
priority once per dispatch cycle. This has the drawback of being less
reactive to runnable priority changes: the previous code would react
immediately, while this might end up using "old" priorities until the
next dispatch cycle. However, dispatch cycles are not supposed to take
very long (seconds, not minutes/hours), so this is not expected to have
much or any practical impact.
Ideally runnables would be maintained in a sorted data structure instead
of the current approach of copying + sorting in the scheduler. This
would however be a much more invasive change to implement, and might
have to wait until we can confirm where the queue runner bottlenecks
actually lie.
Pierre Bourdon
Linus Heckemann