-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.1k
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
CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 #135632
Conversation
@bors try |
…<try> [experiment] CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
good. It worked. Trying again to see if we were just lucky. @bors try |
…<try> [experiment] CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Wooo. Let's test it again. @bors try |
…<try> [experiment] CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
@bors try |
…<try> [experiment] CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
@bors try |
…<try> [experiment] CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
@bors try |
…<try> [experiment] CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
@bors try |
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
From my understanding, this should be a flaky error. |
@bors try |
…<try> CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2 try-job: dist-x86_64-msvc
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Looks good, I'll wait for a reviewer to bors retry 👍 |
@bors retry |
…<try> CI: split x86_64-msvc job using windows 2025 try-job: x86_64-msvc-1 try-job: x86_64-msvc-2 try-job: dist-x86_64-msvc
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
Shouldn't |
@bors r+ |
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (ebbe638): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 3.9%, secondary -2.2%)This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 764.449s -> 763.258s (-0.16%) |
windows-2025 seems to fix the flakiness discribed in #127883 — This PR never failed a
bors try
.This PR also removes the large runner by splitting it into two free runners, addressing rust-lang/infra-team#189 🥳
Too good to be true? Let's see! My suggestion is to merge this PR and observe how it behaves in the
auto
branch in the public dashboard over the following weeks.Additional context
I discussed this change in Zulip as well.
If you want to see a similar PR to this one where
x86_64-msvc
on windows 2022 fails in CI consistently, see #135483 (comment)r? @Kobzol
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
try-job: dist-x86_64-msvc