From: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"X.Org development" <xorg-devel@lists.x.org>,
dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
wayland <wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
"X.Org Foundation Board" <board@foundation.x.org>,
Xorg Members List <members@x.org>,
amd-gfx list <amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Mesa Dev <mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>,
gstreamer-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] gitlab.fd.o financial situation and impact on services
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:48:33 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPM=9txN-RKGwinzsSPrmT_xFjS2J_XUhXVsRQ2pSSe529wpEA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPj87rM76W9y_76WUHR35NS3V4_-RFi9ZM3GA=aED3dD3hWYkg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 18:18, Daniel Stone <daniel@fooishbar.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 03:38, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
> > b) we probably need to take a large step back here.
> >
> > Look at this from a sponsor POV, why would I give X.org/fd.o
> > sponsorship money that they are just giving straight to google to pay
> > for hosting credits? Google are profiting in some minor way from these
> > hosting credits being bought by us, and I assume we aren't getting any
> > sort of discounts here. Having google sponsor the credits costs google
> > substantially less than having any other company give us money to do
> > it.
>
> The last I looked, Google GCP / Amazon AWS / Azure were all pretty
> comparable in terms of what you get and what you pay for them.
> Obviously providers like Packet and Digital Ocean who offer bare-metal
> services are cheaper, but then you need to find someone who is going
> to properly administer the various machines, install decent
> monitoring, make sure that more storage is provisioned when we need
> more storage (which is basically all the time), make sure that the
> hardware is maintained in decent shape (pretty sure one of the fd.o
> machines has had a drive in imminent-failure state for the last few
> months), etc.
>
> Given the size of our service, that's a much better plan (IMO) than
> relying on someone who a) isn't an admin by trade, b) has a million
> other things to do, and c) hasn't wanted to do it for the past several
> years. But as long as that's the resources we have, then we're paying
> the cloud tradeoff, where we pay more money in exchange for fewer
> problems.
Admin for gitlab and CI is a full time role anyways. The system is
definitely not self sustaining without time being put in by you and
anholt still. If we have $75k to burn on credits, and it was diverted
to just pay an admin to admin the real hw + gitlab/CI would that not
be a better use of the money? I didn't know if we can afford $75k for
an admin, but suddenly we can afford it for gitlab credits?
> Yes, we could federate everything back out so everyone runs their own
> builds and executes those. Tinderbox did something really similar to
> that IIRC; not sure if Buildbot does as well. Probably rules out
> pre-merge testing, mind.
Why? does gitlab not support the model? having builds done in parallel
on runners closer to the test runners seems like it should be a thing.
I guess artifact transfer would cost less then as a result.
> The reason we hadn't worked everything out in advance of deploying is
> because Mesa has had 3993 MRs in the not long over a year since
> moving, and a similar number in GStreamer, just taking the two biggest
> users. At the start it was 'maybe let's use MRs if you want to but
> make sure everything still goes through the list', and now it's
> something different. Similarly the CI architecture hasn't been
> 'designed', so much as that people want to run dEQP and Piglit on
> their hardware pre-merge in an open fashion that's actually accessible
> to people, and have just done it.
>
> Again, if you want everything to be centrally
> designed/approved/monitored/controlled, that's a fine enough idea, and
> I'd be happy to support whoever it was who was doing that for all of
> fd.o.
I don't think we have any choice but to have someone centrally
controlling it, You can't have a system in place that lets CI users
burn largs sums of money without authorisation, and that is what we
have now.
Dave.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-28 8:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-27 21:27 gitlab.fd.o financial situation and impact on services Daniel Vetter
2020-02-27 23:45 ` Matt Turner
2020-02-28 7:59 ` Daniel Stone
2020-02-28 10:09 ` Jan Engelhardt
2020-02-28 11:11 ` Daniel Stone
2020-02-28 21:20 ` Matt Turner
2020-02-28 0:21 ` Luc Verhaegen
2020-02-28 0:33 ` Carsten Haitzler
2020-02-28 1:00 ` [Mesa-dev] " Tom Stellard
2020-02-28 1:08 ` Tom Stellard
2020-02-28 3:37 ` [Intel-gfx] " Dave Airlie
2020-02-28 7:44 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-02-28 8:17 ` Daniel Stone
2020-02-28 8:48 ` Dave Airlie [this message]
2020-02-28 9:26 ` Daniel Stone
2020-02-28 19:34 ` [Mesa-dev] " Eric Anholt
2020-02-28 20:30 ` Dave Airlie
2020-02-28 21:22 ` Daniel Vetter
2020-02-28 21:37 ` Nuritzi Sanchez
2020-04-04 13:55 ` Andreas Bergmeier
2020-04-05 14:07 ` Nicolas Dufresne
2020-02-28 9:28 ` Erik Faye-Lund
2020-02-28 9:40 ` Lionel Landwerlin
2020-02-28 10:06 ` Erik Faye-Lund
2020-02-28 10:43 ` Daniel Stone
2020-02-28 11:02 ` Erik Faye-Lund
2020-02-28 11:46 ` Michel Dänzer
2020-02-28 13:08 ` Lionel Landwerlin
2020-02-29 18:14 ` Timur Kristóf
2020-02-29 19:46 ` Nicolas Dufresne
2020-02-29 20:28 ` Timur Kristóf
2020-02-29 21:54 ` Jason Ekstrand
2020-02-29 22:20 ` Nicolas Dufresne
2020-03-01 5:46 ` Marek Olšák
2020-04-03 14:12 ` Michel Dänzer
2020-04-04 15:11 ` Rob Clark
2020-04-04 17:47 ` Nicolas Dufresne
2020-04-04 18:16 ` Rob Clark
2020-04-04 18:41 ` Rob Clark
2020-04-04 18:47 ` Rob Clark
2020-04-04 23:39 ` Peter Hutterer
2020-04-04 23:32 ` Peter Hutterer
2020-04-06 15:42 ` Adam Jackson
2020-04-06 16:34 ` Rob Clark
2020-04-06 17:04 ` Michel Dänzer
2020-04-06 18:00 ` Rob Clark
2020-03-01 14:14 ` [Mesa-dev] [Intel-gfx] " Michel Dänzer
2020-03-01 14:27 ` Nicolas Dufresne
2020-03-01 19:51 ` Jacob Lifshay
2020-03-01 20:18 ` [Intel-gfx] [Mesa-dev] " Jason Ekstrand
2020-03-01 20:30 ` Bridgman, John
2020-03-01 20:49 ` Nicolas Dufresne
2020-03-02 4:53 ` Jason Ekstrand
2020-02-28 9:47 ` [Mesa-dev] [Intel-gfx] " Daniel Vetter
2020-02-28 10:10 ` Erik Faye-Lund
2020-02-28 10:27 ` Lucas Stach
2020-02-28 11:43 ` Michel Dänzer
2020-02-28 17:00 ` [Intel-gfx] [Mesa-dev] " Rob Clark
2020-02-29 15:58 ` Jason Ekstrand
2020-02-28 18:03 ` [Intel-gfx] " Kristian Høgsberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAPM=9txN-RKGwinzsSPrmT_xFjS2J_XUhXVsRQ2pSSe529wpEA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=board@foundation.x.org \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel@fooishbar.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gstreamer-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=members@x.org \
--cc=mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=xorg-devel@lists.x.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).