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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[TEP-0120] Canceling Concurrent PipelineRuns #791

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 29, 2022
Merged

[TEP-0120] Canceling Concurrent PipelineRuns #791

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 29, 2022

Conversation

lbernick
Copy link
Member

@lbernick lbernick commented Aug 19, 2022 •
edited
Loading

This commit adds requirements and use cases for controlling concurrency of PipelineRuns.

Co-authored-by: William Fish williamleofish@gmail.com
Co-authored-by: Vincent Demeester vdemeest@redhat.com
/kind tep

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the kind/tep Categorizes issue or PR as related to a TEP (or needs a TEP). label Aug 19, 2022
@tekton-robot tekton-robot requested review from a-roberts and sm43 August 19, 2022 16:00
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 19, 2022
@lbernick lbernick mentioned this pull request Aug 19, 2022
Closed
lbernick
lbernick commented Aug 19, 2022
View reviewed changes
teps/0117-concurrency-controls.md Outdated
They want to limit the number of concurrent CI runs per team, to prevent one team from using all the available devices
and crowding out CI runs from other teams.
- A Pipeline performs multiple parallelizable things with different concurrency caps, as described in [this comment](https://github.com/tektoncd/pipeline/issues/2591#issuecomment-626778025).
- Allow users to cap the number of matrixed TaskRuns (alpha) that can run at a given time.
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jerop I've included the matrix concurrency use case here as one we want to try to solve for, but I think for an initial version of this proposal it'll be easier to focus just on concurrency of PipelineRuns and descope TaskRuns for future work.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@lbernick note that matrix is used for taskruns and runs for now but it'll be available for pipelineruns as well once pipeline in pipelines is implemented -- so it's still relevant if the focus is pipelineruns

@jerop
Copy link
Member

jerop commented Aug 22, 2022

/assign @jerop

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 22, 2022
@tekton-robot tekton-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 22, 2022
@lbernick lbernick changed the title [TEP-0117] Concurrency controls [TEP-0120] Concurrency controls Aug 22, 2022
@vdemeester vdemeester self-assigned this Aug 23, 2022
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 23, 2022
@lbernick lbernick force-pushed the concurrency branch 4 times, most recently from b8d638c to 3dd1ce8 Compare August 25, 2022 16:58
@lbernick
[TEP-0120] Concurrency controls
60d3b9d 
This commit adds requirements and use cases for controlling concurrency of PipelineRuns.
@lbernick
Copy link
Member Author

@vdemeester @jerop @williamlfish @dibyom I've descoped the proposal to just cancelation for now; we will tackle queueing after implementing cancelation-- PTAL

@lbernick lbernick changed the title [TEP-0120] Concurrency controls [TEP-0120] Canceling Concurrent PipelineRuns Aug 26, 2022
jerop
jerop approved these changes Aug 29, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jerop jerop left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

problem statement looks good to me, just wondering at whether this problem should be addressed at the workflow or pipeline level but we can figure that out in the proposal stage

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jerop, vdemeester

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@pritidesai
Copy link
Member

API WG - /lgtm

@pritidesai
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 29, 2022
@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit 7cb4c56 into tektoncd:main Aug 29, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@vdemeester vdemeester vdemeester approved these changes

@jerop jerop jerop approved these changes

@a-roberts a-roberts Awaiting requested review from a-roberts

@sm43 sm43 Awaiting requested review from sm43

Assignees

@vdemeester vdemeester

@pritidesai pritidesai

@jerop jerop

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/tep Categorizes issue or PR as related to a TEP (or needs a TEP). lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
TEP Steward Assignments
Status: UnAssigned
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@lbernick @jerop @tekton-robot @pritidesai @vdemeester