Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
travis-ci architecture
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  3 messages - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Yaron Naveh  
View profile  
 More options Jul 14 2012, 6:53 am
From: Yaron Naveh <yaron...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 03:53:18 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Jul 14 2012 6:53 am
Subject: travis-ci architecture

Hi

I've been reading about the travis-ci architecture. I liked what I saw.
I've got a couple of questions though:

1. When a worker thread gets a build request it creates a vm from a
snapshot. Is this vm on the local machine? If so it would seem that the
scalability is not elastic since a spike in the number of build requests
would put some builds on hold rather then dynamically allocate a build
environment on the cloud.

2. I read that after the build is over the vm is rolled back. I though that
workers create a new vm from a snapshot each time, why bother rolling back
a specific vm? are vm reused rather then regenerated form snapshots?

Thanks,
Yaron


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Michael Klishin  
View profile  
 More options Jul 14 2012, 10:37 pm
From: Michael Klishin <michael.s.klis...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 19:37:44 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Sat, Jul 14 2012 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: travis-ci architecture

On Saturday, July 14, 2012 2:53:18 PM UTC+4, Yaron Naveh wrote:

> Hi

> I've been reading about the travis-ci architecture. I liked what I saw.
> I've got a couple of questions though:

> 1. When a worker thread gets a build request it creates a vm from a
> snapshot. Is this vm on the local machine? If so it would seem that the
> scalability is not elastic since a spike in the number of build requests
> would put some builds on hold rather then dynamically allocate a build
> environment on the cloud.

Correct. There are two primary reasons for this:

1. This solution was significantly easier to implement and for the first
year or so, Travis was a side project with about 3 people working on it.

2. Having control over our own hardware and colocated machines gave us
flexibility to tune certain VMs or machines to accomodate needs of larger
projects. The first precedent was Ruby on Rails. Today we also have a Maven
mirror on the local 1GB link and we will add more mirrors for cpan, pypi
and so on later this year.

The next step (a non-trivial amount of work) is to remove mapping of
machine to VM types (Ruby VM image, JVM VM image, etc). For this we will
have to completely replace VM technology we use and some automation tools
associated with it. It will likely happen in the next few months.

> 2. I read that after the build is over the vm is rolled back. I though
> that workers create a new vm from a snapshot each time, why bother rolling
> back a specific vm? are vm reused rather then regenerated form snapshots?

VMs are reused, their disk images are snapshotted and rolled back.

MK


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Kevin Kim  
View profile  
 More options Jul 25 2012, 11:15 pm
From: Kevin Kim <kykim...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 23:15:58 -0400
Local: Wed, Jul 25 2012 11:15 pm
Subject: Re: [travis-ci] Re: travis-ci architecture

On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Michael Klishin <

michael.s.klis...@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> The next step (a non-trivial amount of work) is to remove mapping of
> machine to VM types (Ruby VM image, JVM VM image, etc). For this we will
> have to completely replace VM technology we use and some automation tools
> associated with it. It will likely happen in the next few months.

This sounds interesting, are there any details?

Thanks,
-kevin


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »