Simply changing GH Actions runner

[timvaillancourt]

Description

This small tweak to test/ci_workflow_gen.go makes it more straightforward for forks of vitessio/vitess to modify the GitHub Actions runner used for heavier CI jobs (modify the const cores16RunnerName)

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

• "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
• If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
• Tests were added or are not required
• Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
• Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

[vitess-bot]

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

• Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
• Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

• Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

• Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
• New features should be documented.
• There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
• There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

• Is this flag really necessary?
• Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

• Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
• If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

• Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
• Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
• RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
• If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
• vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

[frouioui]

We should probably do the same thing for test/templates/unit_test.tpl and test/templates/cluster_vitess_tester.tpl to be more consistent.

[timvaillancourt]

@frouioui good idea, I made that update and get these errors. I wondered if they make sense to you:

tim@Tims-MacBook-Pro vitess % make generate_ci_workflows >/dev/null            
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: unit_test.tpl:17:15: executing "unit_test.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.unitTest
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: unit_test.tpl:17:15: executing "unit_test.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.unitTest
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: unit_test.tpl:17:15: executing "unit_test.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.unitTest
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: unit_test.tpl:17:15: executing "unit_test.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.unitTest
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: unit_test.tpl:17:15: executing "unit_test.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.unitTest
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: unit_test.tpl:17:15: executing "unit_test.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.unitTest
2025/02/14 00:54:09 Error: template: cluster_vitess_tester.tpl:17:15: executing "cluster_vitess_tester.tpl" at <.RunsOn>: can't evaluate field RunsOn in type *main.vitessTesterTest

[frouioui]

@timvaillancourt, similarly to generateClusterWorkflows the functions generateUnitTestWorkflows and generateVitessTesterWorkflows should confiure the struct we send to the template with RunsOn.

They both use the structs unitTest and vitessTesterTest, which should contain a field RunsOn, like clusterTest.

[timvaillancourt]

@timvaillancourt, similarly to generateClusterWorkflows the functions generateUnitTestWorkflows and generateVitessTesterWorkflows should confiure the struct we send to the template with RunsOn.

Thanks @frouioui, I founds those and my latest commit fixed things

As expected make generate_ci_workflows works and causes no diff to the workflow files:

tim@Tims-MacBook-Pro vitess % make generate_ci_workflows >/dev/null
tim@Tims-MacBook-Pro vitess % echo $?
0
tim@Tims-MacBook-Pro vitess % git diff
tim@Tims-MacBook-Pro vitess %