-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 191
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
[Chore] - Updated CI and Added Caching Feature #691
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #691 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 83.06% 83.07%
=======================================
Files 141 141
Lines 11456 11456
Branches 2114 2114
=======================================
+ Hits 9516 9517 +1
+ Misses 1609 1607 -2
- Partials 331 332 +1 |
@dkoes Fixed CI and Updated CodeQL Workflow as well :) |
This is still broken. You need to rerun the CI build so that you can see what happens when the cache is populated. |
7bb9e20
to
b36102e
Compare
@dkoes I don't have permission to rerun workflow for this specific PR, but I ran it on my fork's branch and the cache works now. Fork's Branch Action Runs
Could you please rerun the workflow for this PR? |
@@ -31,8 +31,10 @@ | |||
"build:prod": "webpack --config webpack.prod.js --mode production", | |||
"prepare": "npm run build:dev && npm run build:prod", | |||
"postinstall": "npm run build", | |||
"jest": "npx jest --testPathIgnorePatterns=render.test.js", | |||
"jest": "npx jest --testPathIgnorePatterns=render.test.js --maxWorkers=50%", | |||
"jest:ci": "npx jest --testPathIgnorePatterns=render.test.js --runInBand", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found a pretty good blog related to improving jest test speeds, https://dev.to/vantanev/make-your-jest-tests-up-to-20-faster-by-changing-a-single-setting-i36 and according to it --runInBand
is useful in resource-constrained environments like CI, where the overhead of worker processes is higher than the speedup of running tests in parallel.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also benched the tests using https://github.com/sharkdp/hyperfine and these are the results that I got. Over the course of 3-4 runs, --maxWorkers=50%
seemed to be faster
770b83d
to
2e56eca
Compare
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
2e56eca
to
2cefd54
Compare
Signed-off-by: Adithya Krishna <adikrish@redhat.com>
Description:
node_modules
as according to https://github.com/actions/cache/blob/main/examples.md#node---npm, it is not recommendedInstead of using
npm install
we would be usingnpm ci
which is usually used for CI Environments