Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Use explicit and easier to use runs-on approach for CI workflows - #38601
Merged
Conversation
potiuk
requested review from
Taragolis, aritra24, eladkal, ephraimbuddy, hussein-awala and pankajkoti
and removed request for
ashb, jedcunningham and kaxilMarch 28, 2024 23:14
potiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
7 times, most recently
from
March 29, 2024 00:36
90218a9 to
44befd2Comparepotiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
from
March 29, 2024 13:25
44befd2 to
472a2e7Comparepotiuk
commented
Mar 29, 2024
MemberAuthor
This one also looks good-to-go with much easier way to manage what runners are used (and I am going to have some follow-ups once this is better organized). |
potiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
from
March 29, 2024 14:37
472a2e7 to
a0b3924Comparepotiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
2 times, most recently
from
March 29, 2024 16:43
6ad6c1b to
f5e2602Comparepotiuk
commented
Mar 29, 2024
MemberAuthor
Green :) |
potiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
from
March 31, 2024 13:15
b609874 to
6871245Comparepotiuk
commented
Mar 31, 2024
MemberAuthor
Yep. good point. I also reverted the sequenece and we have now: |
potiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
13 times, most recently
from
March 31, 2024 14:46
f9987ef to
e036e8cComparepotiuk
commented
Mar 31, 2024
MemberAuthor
I think I figured it .... 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 |
potiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
from
March 31, 2024 14:48
e036e8c to
8a55f69Comparepotiuk
commented
Mar 31, 2024
MemberAuthor
Also I standardized |
Depending on selective checks, but also on the job executed, we choose whether to run job on public runners or self-hosted runners. So far the set of labels to select the runners were passed in a bit inconsistent way. Outputs of selective checks can only be strings and the `run-as` accepts array of strings (labels) - so we were using fromJSON to convert between the two. And we used runs-on inputs on a number of our workflows to pass the selection. However this meant that runs-on could be either string or array and that sometimes we passed public/self-hosted labels as strings directly and some of those were hard-coded. This PR changes it consistently across the board to introduce consistent approach: * build info have no selective checks results yet, so for them runs-on is hardcoded * similarly for "windows" and release jobs that are manually run without running selective checks * selective checks will produce three outuputs - JSON stringiified array of labels: * default (one that is selected depending on who runs the build) * public (for cases where we want to force the builds to use public runners * self-hosted (for cases where we want to force the builds to use self-hosted runners * all the outputs are named `<type>-runs-on-as-string` to make it clear they are all strings * all inputs of workflows expectings strings are named the same (with as-string suffix and <type> prefix) * whenever a job is run, we pass "runs-on" parameter to be `fromJSON` with appropriate type we want to use passed as input This will make it easier to reason on which job is using which type of runner and it will make it easier in the future to make it more flexible when we add ASF self-hosted runners and possibly our own K8S runners, or when we would want to change labels for public runners or self-hosted runners.
potiukforce-pushed
the
consistent-approach-for-runs-on-usage
branch
from
April 1, 2024 08:21
8a55f69 to
1a9c8b7Compareephraimbuddy pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 2, 2024
) Depending on selective checks, but also on the job executed, we choose whether to run job on public runners or self-hosted runners. So far the set of labels to select the runners were passed in a bit inconsistent way. Outputs of selective checks can only be strings and the `run-as` accepts array of strings (labels) - so we were using fromJSON to convert between the two. And we used runs-on inputs on a number of our workflows to pass the selection. However this meant that runs-on could be either string or array and that sometimes we passed public/self-hosted labels as strings directly and some of those were hard-coded. This PR changes it consistently across the board to introduce consistent approach: * build info have no selective checks results yet, so for them runs-on is hardcoded * similarly for "windows" and release jobs that are manually run without running selective checks * selective checks will produce three outuputs - JSON stringiified array of labels: * default (one that is selected depending on who runs the build) * public (for cases where we want to force the builds to use public runners * self-hosted (for cases where we want to force the builds to use self-hosted runners * all the outputs are named `<type>-runs-on-as-string` to make it clear they are all strings * all inputs of workflows expectings strings are named the same (with as-string suffix and <type> prefix) * whenever a job is run, we pass "runs-on" parameter to be `fromJSON` with appropriate type we want to use passed as input This will make it easier to reason on which job is using which type of runner and it will make it easier in the future to make it more flexible when we add ASF self-hosted runners and possibly our own K8S runners, or when we would want to change labels for public runners or self-hosted runners. (cherry picked from commit 9da08a5)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Depending on selective checks, but also on the job executed, we choose whether to run job on public runners or self-hosted runners. So far the set of labels to select the runners were passed in a bit inconsistent way. Outputs of selective checks can only be strings and the
run-asaccepts array of strings (labels) - so we were using fromJSON to convert between the two. And we used runs-on inputs on a number of our workflows to pass the selection.However this meant that runs-on could be either string or array and that sometimes we passed public/self-hosted labels as strings directly and some of those were hard-coded.
This PR changes it consistently across the board to introduce consistent approach:
<type>-runs-on-as-stringto make it clear they are all stringsfromJSONwith appropriate type we want to use passed as inputThis will make it easier to reason on which job is using which type of runner and it will make it easier in the future to make it more flexible when we add ASF self-hosted runners and possibly our own K8S runners, or when we would want to change labels for public runners or self-hosted runners.
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.