Is there a way to setup up a build's priority in a yaml based pipeline? There seem to be references to build priority in the Azure DevOps API, but nothing in how to do this via yaml. I thought there might be some docs in the Triggers section, but no.
We need this because we have some fast building NuGet packages, but these get starved via slow-build pipelines making turnaround time for packages painful.
The closest thing I could come up with to working around this is via agent demands in the yaml
demands:
- Agent.ComputerName = XYZ
to separate build pipelines, but this is a bit of a hack and doesn't use agents efficiently.
A way to set this in UI would be acceptable, but I couldn't seem to find anything.
Recently Azure DevOps introduced the ability to manually specify a build/release runs next.
This manifests as a Run next button. (image source).
So while you can't say "this pipeline always takes priority" yet, you can manually force a specific run to the front of the queue.
If you need a specific pipeline to always take priority, then you likely want to setup a separate agent pool just for those pipelines, or use demands as Leo Liu mentioned.
Setting build priority in yaml or UI
I'm afraid this feature is not yet supported in Azure DevOps at this moment.
There is a popular user voice about it, you can upvote it and check the feedback from that ticket.
Currently as a workaround, just like what you did, set the demands in build definitions to force building with the specific agents.
Hope this helps.
Related
I'm having trouble setting up incremental builds in Azure DevOps. There are too many variables with workspace cleaning to ensure that I don't have to do a full build every time.
I had a thought that I could just always copy the built files to a location outside of the agents' purview, and then copy those files into my release directory before each build.
Would that allow for an incremental build?
You probably can 'fool' the incremental logic but you would be working against the tooling.
For an actual incremental build you need to build in the same place.
In the context of Azure DevOps, that means building the same job of the same pipeline on the same agent. You can't let the build move around between agents or even between work folders of the same agent. (It also means that your agent and the state of the agent work folder must be persistent across the builds.)
You can make the job, stage, or pipeline 'sticky' to one dedicated agent by using demands and capabilities.
Decide what will be on your dedicated agent. Will it be the entire pipeline or just a stage of the pipeline or just a job of a stage?
For the dedicated agent, create a capability that represents the build. Using the name of the pipeline (or pipeline+stage or pipeline+stage+job depending) for the name of the capability is handy and self-documenting. You can create the capability in Azure DevOps as a 'user capability' of the agent.
Change your pipeline to add a demand on the custom capability. The demand can test if the custom capability exists. In a YAML pipeline the demands are configured in the pool definition.
This is an easier and less brittle approach then trying to outsmart the incremental logic.
With this approach, all builds will be done in series on the one agent. If the build takes a long time (which may be the motivation for building incrementally) and the build is tied to one agent, the 'throughput' of builds will be limited. If a build's duration is 1 hour, there will be a maximum of 8 builds in an 8 hour work day.
Tying specific builds to specific agents is not the intent in Azure DevOps. For a monolithic legacy codebase where there is no notion of semantic versioning and immutable interfaces, you may have little choice. But a better way is to use package management. Instead of one big build, have multiple smaller builds that produce packages that are used by other builds. The challenge is that packages will not work well without some attention and discipline around versioning and keeping published interfaces and contracts unchanged.
I am not able to find a way to stop the auto triggering of the pipeline whenever I push code to bitbucket.
My assumption is that you want more control over when your pipeline does certain things.
Rather than achieving this through stopping the pipeline from getting triggered, I'd recommend using either stage transitions or manual approvals to achieve this control inside the pipeline.
Stage transitions are better when you want to "turn off" a pipeline and have the latest thing run through when you turn it back on.
Manual approvals are better when you want the version to be locked while waiting for approval so you can run tests without worrying that the version will change.
You mentioned in your comment that you wanted to only run your pipeline at certain times, so a way you could do that is to enable and disable the stage transition after source on a schedule.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/latest/userguide/transitions.html
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/codepipeline/latest/userguide/approvals.html
You can disable DetectChanges parameter on your Source action as explained here. Extract with the relevant context:
DetectChanges: Controls automatically starting your pipeline when a new commit is made on the configured repository and branch. If unspecified, the default value is true, and the field does not display by default.
This works on Bitbucket, GitHub, and GitHub Enterprise Server actions. I have a CloudFormation template configured with this option and works. Not sure about the same option on AWS console, because I saw that some configurations are only available from CloudFormation or aws cli. As you can read "this field does not display by default".
I'm setting up a Continuous Delivery pipeline for my team with Jenkins. As a final step, we want to deploy to AWS.
I came across this while searching: :
The last step is a button where you can click to trigger deploying. Very nice! However, I searched throw Jenkins plugins page but I don't think it is there (or it is under a vague name).
Any ideas what it could be?
I'm not sure about the specific plugin you are looking for, but there is a Jenkins plugin for CodeDeploy, which can automatically create a deployment as a post-build action. See: https://github.com/awslabs/aws-codedeploy-plugin
It really depends on how what kind of requirements you have on the actual deployment procedure. One thing to keep in mind if you do infrastructure as code to setup your pipelines automatically (e.g. through JobDSL or Jenkins Job Builder), is that the particular plugins must be supported. For that reason it some times might be more convenient to just script your deployments instead of relying on plugins. I've implemented multiple deployment jobs from Jenkins to AWS by just using plain AWS CLI commands, e.g. triggering Cloudformation creation/updates.
It turns out that there is a button to trigger an operation in the plugin. It was hard to detect as the UI of the plugin is redesigned and the button became smaller.
I would like to ask about your experience with build server for embedded systems. What are you using (if any), and what are good and bad sides.
We are developing mainly for microcontrollers without operating system.
At this moment I'm trying to use Jenkins and my build is running. But I have some problem with projects structure. When I want all plugins working, than I need flat job structure. But we have few projects that are developed in parallel, and then job view start to be messy.
I've tried folders, but than some plugins stopped working.
I would like to build a pipeline, that is running sequential, but have parallel jobs inside. eg. Commit stage have: compile, lint check, style check, unit tests. all of them can run in parallel and when all are successful next stage is executed.
What I need from Build server at this moment:
build pipeline support
user authorization based on LDAP
parallel job execution
hierarchical projects (projects/configurations groups)
reports from xUnit, Lint, Compiler warnings, Robot framework.
slave/agents support, tags for slave
privileges based on ldap groups
privileges per group/project
I'm opened for any suggestions, open source and commercial.
I was looking at Bamboo on videos look very nice but I didn't try it yet.
We have two development teams, that are developing different projects. It could be nice to have projects grouped for teams and privileges for group. Members of one group shouldn't modify builds of other. But it is more "nice to have" than "must have".
TeamCity
I tried to use TeamCity. Building build pipeline is easier than in Jenkins, just click add Step.
One thing that I found difficult is making steps in parallel in one configuration. For example after commit I would like to run in parallel Lint, Unit tests, Compile to save some time. I found solution, but it make pipeline harder to view and maintain.
TeamCity support multiple configuration in projects which solve problem with jobs grouping. I didn't found option to group projects.
TeamCity is a free, Java-based CI server from JetBrains. We've been using it very successfully (for very different kinds of projects) and I would unreservedly recommend it to you. To each of your requirements:
Build pipelines are configured as a series of steps within a build configuration. A project can have an arbitrary number of configurations, which in turn can have an arbitrary number of steps.
LDAP integration is fully supported.
Build pipelines can be executed in parallel. TeamCity delegates work to Build Agents, which are typically distinct servers that have all the necessary tools (frameworks, etc.) to perform the steps of a build configuration. The free version of TeamCity comes with licenses for three agents, so you could have up to three builds running in parallel. Additional agents can be licensed for a nominal fee.
By 'hierarchical projects' I understand you to mean that the completion of one build pipeline will automatically trigger the start of a subsequent pipeline. This is supported, and build/version numbers can be passed between the stages for consistency.
XUnit has first-class support. Lint/compiler reports can be saved as 'artifacts' of the build for easy review later. Essentially, a lot of frameworks have built-in support in TeamCity, and for everything else you can execute arbitrary shell commands, the output of which can be saved as artifacts or used in subsequent build steps.
Slave/agent support is central to the TeamCity model, as noted above.
All of this is highly configurable and customizable. We've been able to do a lot of diverse, complex things with TeamCity, and it has been totally solid and stable for us. And it looks good, too -- the server dashboard arranges information in an easily-understood way.
Disclaimer: I work for Atlassian so I'm a bit biased.
Configuring your build pipeline in Bamboo is pretty easy to do. Bamboo operates based on a Plan → Stage → Job structure, listed from higher to lower order. Check out the Bamboo Plan Structure.
Every Project in Bamboo holds a collection of Plans. Plans are comprised of one or more Stages. Stages run sequentially and are comprised of one or more Jobs. Jobs run in parallel and are comprised of one or more Tasks (tasks run sequentially, but can be placed in separate Jobs so that they run in parallel and speed up build time). Agents in Bamboo are machines or services that perform your build steps. An entire Job will execute on a single Agent. You can read more about Agents here. As for slave tags, the ability to make certain agents exclusively tied to certain builds or projects is on the short-list for new features.
To answer your other points:
user authorization based on LDAP/privileges based on ldap groups/project: You can connect to an external LDAP server to manage users and permissions. Bamboo has a groups feature or if your team is using JIRA you can take advantage of JIRA groups to set up global permissions, plan permissions, and also indicate which users will receive notifications on a plan’s build results. Global permissions control who has access to build plans and the Bamboo server whereas Plan permissions control who can perform specific operations on a Plan and its Jobs.
hierarchical projects (projects/configurations groups): Bamboo does support parent & child plan structure. There are several ways you can set up triggering for builds. One of them is to base triggers on other builds, that is, Plan builds are triggered by preceding successful builds of other plans or if other specified plans are building successfully. Example: If Plan A builds successfully it will automatically trigger builds of Plans B & C.
reports from xUnit, Lint, Compiler warnings, Robot framework: Bamboo can run any build process that can be started from a command line. Support includes Maven/Maven2, Ant, make, MSBuild, NAnt, Grails, devenv.exe, and any xUnix-compiant framework (JUnit, Selenium, JWebUnit, NUnit, PHPUnit, etc...).
Is it possible to trigger a Hudson/Jenkins build only when a certain string appears in a commit-message?
For instance, I want to trigger a build that rolls out my application to the dev environment by writing a commit message like:
MYPROJECT-123 Fixed NPE in MyClass.java #deploy:DEV
The general idea is described in this great talk on Continuos Deployment but I couldn't find any information on how to do this in Hudson.
I would prefer to have this behavior in Hudson itself and not in an external system like commit-hooks or web-hooks.
I don't know of an out of the box way you can parse the SCM message as part of the trigger. You have a couple of options that might achieve what you want though
Write your own Hudson SCM plugin
Chain your jobs together into a build pipeline. The first job could simply look for that message in the changelog.xml to determine if the next build is triggered or not.
If you are looking at building a pipeline of build jobs, check out the build-pipeline-plugin. http://www.centrumsystems.com.au/blog/?p=121
Anyone got a more elegant solution??
Cheers,
Geoff
There is a plugin called Commit Message Trigger Plugin, but it had just a 0.1 release.
Maybe the easiest way is to use a version control post commit (or push) trigger to start a Hudson Job. You'd one anyway to automatically start your build.