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

run tests on Beaker with NFS cache #120

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Feb 20, 2023
Merged

run tests on Beaker with NFS cache #120

merged 15 commits into from
Feb 20, 2023

Conversation

epwalsh
Copy link
Member

@epwalsh epwalsh commented Feb 17, 2023

Changes proposed:

  • Sets up unit tests to run on Beaker via beaker-run-action (this is what we use to run GPU tests on Beaker for Tango).
  • Splits up tests to run in different suites, a CI job for each suite. This reduces CI runtime from 10+ minutes to 4 minutes and could be reduced even more by splitting off more suites. Note that suite A is the catch-all. Anything not explicitly marked for another suite will be put into A.

Once https://github.com/allenai/reconfig/issues/1166 is resolved we should update the cache location.

@epwalsh epwalsh changed the title run tests on Beaker run tests on Beaker with NFS cache Feb 18, 2023
@epwalsh epwalsh marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2023 00:29
Comment on lines +13 to +21
# These are tasks are known to fail for now due to an unreachable server.
known_failures = {
"lambada_mt_en",
"lambada_mt_fr",
"lambada_mt_de",
"lambada_mt_it",
"lambada_mt_es",
"triviaqa",
}
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I had to xfail these tests because the server they rely on is apparently down. @dirkgr you might want to look into this more, maybe there's a new URL we should be using.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm. Once they are cached, we are much more robust to such failures.

@epwalsh epwalsh requested a review from dirkgr February 18, 2023 00:45
Copy link
Member

@dirkgr dirkgr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved with question

Comment on lines +81 to +92
test_suite:
- name: A
mark: "not suite_B and not suite_C and not suite_D"

- name: B
mark: "suite_B"

- name: C
mark: "suite_C"

- name: D
mark: "suite_D"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is this for? More parallelism?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yea, as I mentioned in the description I broke the tests up into arbitrary groups aka "suites".

Comment on lines +13 to +21
# These are tasks are known to fail for now due to an unreachable server.
known_failures = {
"lambada_mt_en",
"lambada_mt_fr",
"lambada_mt_de",
"lambada_mt_it",
"lambada_mt_es",
"triviaqa",
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm. Once they are cached, we are much more robust to such failures.

@dirkgr dirkgr merged commit e8b671e into main Feb 20, 2023
@dirkgr dirkgr deleted the fix-ci branch February 20, 2023 19:41
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.

2 participants