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.

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: 🤖 Use repo vars to determine the runner size #2724

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 14, 2025

Conversation

ZedLi
Copy link
Collaborator

@ZedLi ZedLi commented Mar 12, 2025

Description

Change the jobs to use a repo var to determine the runner size. Private repos and public repos have different default sizing so we'll need to vary them. See this thread

Currently I have boundary-ui set to use "ubuntu-latest" and enterprise to use ["self-hosted", "ubuntu-latest-x64"]

@ZedLi ZedLi requested a review from a team as a code owner March 12, 2025 22:01
Copy link

vercel bot commented Mar 12, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
boundary-ui ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Mar 13, 2025 11:10pm
boundary-ui-desktop ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Mar 13, 2025 11:10pm

@ZedLi ZedLi force-pushed the chore/fix-runner-sizing branch from e9bcb82 to 2ec0b24 Compare March 12, 2025 22:35
@ZedLi ZedLi changed the title chore: 🤖 Change to self hosted runners for test jobs chore: 🤖 Change to larger github hosted runners for test jobs Mar 12, 2025
@ZedLi ZedLi changed the title chore: 🤖 Change to larger github hosted runners for test jobs chore: 🤖 Change to large github hosted runners for test jobs Mar 12, 2025
hashicc
hashicc previously approved these changes Mar 13, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@hashicc hashicc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚀

calcaide
calcaide previously approved these changes Mar 13, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@calcaide calcaide left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for taking care!!

@calcaide
Copy link
Collaborator

None blocking comment: I do see the latest Validate Monorepo workflow was cancelled, do we have a successful run where it uses the desired runners?

@ZedLi
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ZedLi commented Mar 13, 2025

None blocking comment: I do see the latest Validate Monorepo workflow was cancelled, do we have a successful run where it uses the desired runners?

I'm still waiting on access to these runners, they're not provisioned to us by default
edit: I'm now just using vars to handle this so it ran on the same runner as it previously did

@ZedLi ZedLi dismissed stale reviews from calcaide and hashicc via 63a9cc3 March 13, 2025 21:30
@ZedLi ZedLi force-pushed the chore/fix-runner-sizing branch from 2ec0b24 to 63a9cc3 Compare March 13, 2025 21:30
@ZedLi ZedLi changed the title chore: 🤖 Change to large github hosted runners for test jobs chore: 🤖 Use repo vars to determine the runner size Mar 13, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@DhariniJeeva DhariniJeeva left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks good!

Copy link
Collaborator

@lisbet-alvarez lisbet-alvarez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice work!!

Copy link
Collaborator

@calcaide calcaide left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the work, I left a none blocing comment/question 🙌

@ZedLi ZedLi merged commit 1ac7d1e into main Mar 14, 2025
13 checks passed
@ZedLi ZedLi deleted the chore/fix-runner-sizing branch March 14, 2025 15:15
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.

6 participants