-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
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
GHA jobs fail because of too many requests #162
Comments
I just observed the same thing on https://github.com/rapidsai/ci-imgs/actions/runs/11614334107/job/32342353447 43 of 270 jobs failed because they hit this rate limit. All succeeded on a rebuild. Just posting since this is an old issue, to note that this is still a problem we hit sometimes. |
I just merged #216, which limits this repo to running 150 jobs at a time within a workflow run. Let's see if that helps. |
@jameslamb what data do we want to see before we close this issue? |
🤷🏻 I don't know, there are so many factors that affect whether or not we hit this. Let's say when the next round of |
In #219 we reduced this further to 50 parallel jobs. Saw multiple runs on different days where most jobs succeeded and 0 had rate-limiting issues. ref: #219 (comment) If the job triggered by the merge of #219 also succeeds without any rate-limiting issues, I think we should close this. Build to watch: https://github.com/rapidsai/ci-imgs/actions/runs/12816222911 |
Pretty similar to what we saw on #219... 265 out of the 270 build jobs succeeded, and that took about 27 minutes. Importantly, none of the failures were related to rate-limiting
Just restarted the failed jobs there. I'd like to see all the pushes to DockerHub also succeed without rate-limiting issues before we close this. |
All the pushes succeeded, with 0 need for restarts! https://github.com/rapidsai/ci-imgs/actions/runs/12816222911 I think this can be closed. Thanks @bdice for keeping it moving forward with #219 |
Have started seeing GHA jobs fail because of too many request (for example:
This is the same as issue ( rapidsai/miniforge-cuda#72 ), which already contains suggestions on how this could be resolved
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: