Skip to content
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

ansible: add test-digitalocean-freebsd13-x64-1 #3918

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 4, 2024

Conversation

richardlau
Copy link
Member

@richardlau richardlau commented Sep 27, 2024

@richardlau
Copy link
Member Author

Test builds:

* v18.x-staging: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/All/job/richardlau-node-test-commit-freebsd/1/

* v20.x-staging: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/All/job/richardlau-node-test-commit-freebsd/2/

hmm. v18.x-staging build passed.
v20.x-staging build failed twice in a row with the agent disconnecting while running tests 😞.

@richardlau
Copy link
Member Author

v20.x-staging build failed twice in a row with the agent disconnecting while running tests 😞.

The new FreeBSD 13 machine compared to the existing FreeBSD 12 machine has the same amount of RAM (2 GB) and vCPUs (2). It appears to have half the amount of available swap (1 GB vs 2 GB) -- I'll see if increasing that helps.

@richardlau
Copy link
Member Author

There's a note in https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/config/#create-swapfile

Swap files on ZFS file systems are strongly discouraged, as swapping can lead to system hangs.

So I guess it's back to reimaging as UFS (as opposed to ZFS), or explicitly provisioning secondary storage to attach to the droplet.

@richardlau
Copy link
Member Author

There's a note in https://docs.freebsd.org/en/books/handbook/config/#create-swapfile

Swap files on ZFS file systems are strongly discouraged, as swapping can lead to system hangs.

So I guess it's back to reimaging as UFS (as opposed to ZFS), or explicitly provisioning secondary storage to attach to the droplet.

I've reimaged the machine with the UFS image and added 2 GB of additional swap.

test CI (v20.x-staging): https://ci.nodejs.org/job/richardlau-node-test-commit-freebsd/7/

@richardlau
Copy link
Member Author

test CI (v20.x-staging): https://ci.nodejs.org/job/richardlau-node-test-commit-freebsd/7/

Passed!

Double check test runs (since the machine was reimaged):

@richardlau
Copy link
Member Author

I think my plan for this is:

  • Merge/land this PR.
  • Open another PR to exclude FreeBSD 13 for now on Node.js >= 22 (similar to the case with FreeBSD 12 now). If someone can figure out how to fix the build for Node.js >= 22 we can add it back later.
  • Update the main node-test-commit-freebsd job to build on FreeBSD 13 instead of 12. Probably after the release proposal for Node.js 20.18.0 is done to not get in the way of it 🙂.
  • Migrate the FreeBSD 12 machines to 13. I'm actually not sure on this one whether it's better to retire these and create a new droplet for a second FreeBSD 13 machine as, if I'm reading correctly, it appears the new FreeBSD droplet is cheaper than the existing FreeBSD 12 ones?

@richardlau richardlau merged commit ba594fe into nodejs:main Oct 4, 2024
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants