https://pantsbuild.org/ logo
#development
Title
# development
b

bitter-ability-32190

12/23/2022, 3:45 PM
Last thing (maybe) while I'm thinking on the tests. Tests that use
run_pants
would surely be over-saturating the system, no? You have the main Pants daemon process spawning N test subprocesses, where some subset of those run Pants (and I don't see us passing
rule_threads_core
or
process_execution_local_parallelism
) which then themselves allocate based on CPU count. Is that right?
h

hundreds-father-404

12/23/2022, 3:48 PM
absolutely I think we're getting resource contention. It's much faster to run a single IT at-a-time than run multiple at a time. And it helps explain the timeouts we get in CI
b

bitter-ability-32190

12/23/2022, 3:50 PM
I'm wondering if we should refactor those to
rule_runner
where possible. Otherwise, limit the process count to like 1 or 2
h

hundreds-father-404

12/23/2022, 3:53 PM
Otherwise, limit the process count to like 1 or 2
That is probably excellent low hanging fruit
e

enough-analyst-54434

12/23/2022, 3:59 PM
Everything being discussed sounds like good examples of bad creep that are good to fix - but isn't the motivating problem a large blowup at a point in time? Are you just trying to clear away cobwebs to make it easier to diagnose the big blowup or do I have that wrong?
b

bitter-ability-32190

12/23/2022, 4:10 PM
I'm making note of cobwebs so that when we do fix the blowup we can clear those on the way out
And now I understand the boom. The filewatching was making the boom. As was the case with symlinks, the dogfooding Pants for testing yields very surprising results