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 larger runners and disable setup-go caching on Windows for CI #1133

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 3, 2024

Conversation

bflad
Copy link
Member

@bflad bflad commented Dec 3, 2024

Reference: actions/setup-go#495

This improves PR testing from >15 minutes to <5 minutes by using larger runners (in runner group so we can tune them without adjusting workflow configuration) and by disabling setup-go caching on Windows. Previously, it could take up to 10 minutes to download and unarchive the setup-go cache on Windows runners due to an acknowledged issue. While this could potentially introduce transient network issues downloading the Go modules from Google's proxies, those issues are generally pretty rare in my experience. We could alternatively change the module cache environment variables on Windows to point at the second hard drive on the runner, but that seemed more likely to break at some point outside our control. Ideally GitHub will fix the setup-go action and we'll just remove the Windows-specific cache: false after upgrading.

@bflad bflad force-pushed the bflad/larger-runners branch from 407b03f to 5102576 Compare December 3, 2024 21:29
Reference: actions/setup-go#495

Previously, it could take up to 10 minutes to download and unarchive the cache on Windows runners.
@bflad bflad changed the title chore: Use larger runners for CI chore: Use larger runners and disable setup-go caching on Windows for CI Dec 3, 2024
@bflad bflad merged commit 20646fb into main Dec 3, 2024
3 checks passed
@bflad bflad deleted the bflad/larger-runners branch December 3, 2024 22:19
@bflad
Copy link
Member Author

bflad commented Dec 3, 2024

Going to verify the release workflow by merging #1130 right now 👍

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