Re: Draft release notes complete

On 05/10/2012 11:24 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:49:51PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/10/2012 01:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> Bruce Momjian<bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>>>>> The docs finally built 90 minutes after my commit, and the URL above is
>>>>> now working. (Does it always take this long to update?)
>>>> I believe the new implementation of that stuff is that the devel docs
>>>> are built whenever the buildfarm member guaibasaurus runs for HEAD,
>>>> which it seems to do on an hourly schedule. This is definitely not as
>>>> fast-responding as Peter's former custom script, but I'm not sure if
>>>> it's worth thinking of another way.
>>>>
>>> I don't see any reason it can't run more frequently, though. Currently a run
>>> takes 15 minutes or so. We could reduce that by making it skip some steps,
>>> and get it down to about 10 minutes. It would be perfectly reasonable to run
>>> every 5 minutes (it won't schedule concurrent runs - if the lock file is
>>> held by another run it exits gracefully). Of course, that's up to Magnus and
>>> Stefan.
>> If we can make it do *just* the docs, we can certainly run it a bit
>> more often. But we don't want to make it run the full set of checks
>> more or less continously, since the machine is shared with a number of
>> other tasks...
>>
>> I don't think 5 minutes is anywhere near necessary even for the docs,
>> but there is a lot of room between 5 minutes and 4 hours, so we can
>> definitely shorten it.
> Do you want me to just setup a build on my machine like we did before;
> 5 minutes is no problem for me.
>
> I use the doc build to show patch submitters what their final work looks
> like, and anything more than a few minutes delay makes that useless.
>

It's been done the current way for quite a few months now. If you're
only noticing it now is it really such an inconvenience? Having said
that, I'm not at all opposed to reducing the lag time.

cheers

andrew