Skip to content

[Do not merge] testing CI build cache - #4916

Closed
anupsdf wants to merge 3 commits into
stellar:masterfrom
anupsdf:ci_cache
Closed

[Do not merge] testing CI build cache#4916
anupsdf wants to merge 3 commits into
stellar:masterfrom
anupsdf:ci_cache

Conversation

@anupsdf

@anupsdf anupsdf commented Sep 1, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

testing CI build cache

@anupsdf

anupsdf commented Sep 2, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I need to dig into this a bit more but the size of the cache seem to have dropped quite a bit with this change. The cache used in this PR are tagged with refs/pull/4916/merge when compared to another PR 4915 in the screenshot. This is helpful since we have 10 GB cache capacity and this PR used up 2.15 GB of cache.

Linux-gcc-* dropped from 680 MB to 540 MB
Linux-clang-* dropped from 680 MB to 420 MB

Screenshot 2025-09-01 at 11 07 54 PM Screenshot 2025-09-01 at 11 12 34 PM

runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
# `actions:write` permission is required to delete caches
actions: write

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The cleanup of old cache would need Actions: write permission for the GITHUB_TOKEN. The current token has read permissions.

https://github.com/stellar/stellar-core/actions/runs/17415709423/job/49449860025?pr=4916#step:1:20
GITHUB_TOKEN Permissions
  Actions: read
  Attestations: read
  Checks: read
  Contents: read
  Deployments: read
  Discussions: read
  Issues: read
  Metadata: read
  Models: read
  Packages: read
  Pages: read
  PullRequests: read
  RepositoryProjects: read
  SecurityEvents: read
  Statuses: read

@graydon graydon left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the added cache pressure coming from branches/PRs here will probably cause cached master state to get evicted and lead to more misses overall. at least that was the theory we were operating on: both final merges and branches/PRs are all ultimately close to master, so master is the most important thing to remain in-cache. so I'm not sure this is worth doing at this point.

(Of course if we ever get larger caches through github or 3rd party runners we should cache everything, it's just we only have 10GB to work with)

@anupsdf

anupsdf commented Sep 11, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Closing this since we are exploring 3rd party cache options.

@anupsdf anupsdf closed this Sep 11, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants