[arch-devops] Let's get a big build box
bluewind at xinu.at
Fri Jan 25 16:52:09 UTC 2019
On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 02:30:43PM +0100, Sven-Hendrik Haase via arch-devops <arch-devops at lists.archlinux.org> wrote:
> In that case, I put forth the next best contender, the Hetzner
> AX160-NVMe at 164€/month base price.
That's certainly a much more realistic option, but I'm still not sure if
we really need it. If I look at the cpu graph of soyuz for the last
month, I see a lot of idle time. There's a base load from quassel/matrix
which should really be moved elsewhere (a hetzner cloud VM maybe?) and
the occasional peak, but I don't really see us needing a bigger machine
just yet. I see the build server more as a support machine in case a
packager doesn't have a suitable build machine themselves or if their
network connection is too slow to upload the packages. For that purpose
I'd say the load that soyuz has is perfectly fine and no upgrade is
That said, I know that you want a faster machine for your big packages.
Since I don't have any packages like that personally, I don't have a
strong opinion here. Also I fear that if we have a really beefy machine,
it might attract more attention from packagers with slower machines and
therefore it might be more loaded than what we have now. I mean, who in
their right mind wouldn't want to build on the fancy, new, super-fast
build server where the same build takes only 1/4 of the time. I'd rather
have a second machine similar to soyuz so that we can allow more people
to build at the same time without stepping on each other's toes. Then
again, we do have sgp.pkgbuild.com and we could probably convert 1-3
more machines if needed. I agree that these machines are "slow", but, to
some degree, I see that as a good thing. I hope this explanation makes
sense. If not feel free to tell me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the arch-devops