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

🌱 Increase ulimit nofiles on image-build.yaml #1746

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 6, 2024
Merged

🌱 Increase ulimit nofiles on image-build.yaml #1746

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 6, 2024

Conversation

sjd78
Copy link
Member

@sjd78 sjd78 commented Mar 6, 2024

Builds keep failing with EMFILE errors, so follow the advice from a similar issue work around: npm/cli#4783 (comment)

Builds keep failing with EMFILE errors, so follow the advice from a similar issue work around: npm/cli#4783 (comment)

Signed-off-by: Scott Dickerson <[email protected]>
@sjd78 sjd78 changed the title Increase ulimit nofiles on image-build.yaml 🌱 Increase ulimit nofiles on image-build.yaml Mar 6, 2024
fix typo

Signed-off-by: Scott Dickerson <[email protected]>
@sjd78
Copy link
Member Author

sjd78 commented Mar 6, 2024

The multiarch build with this nofiles change works great on my fork: https://github.com/sjd78/tackle2-ui/actions/runs/8174501095

(or at least it does if npm install doesn't start timing out / get rate limited)

@sjd78
Copy link
Member Author

sjd78 commented Mar 6, 2024

Still hitting the error today on merge to main: https://github.com/konveyor/tackle2-ui/actions/runs/8175674051/job/22353327517#step:7:71

@sjd78 sjd78 merged commit 3e3d690 into main Mar 6, 2024
6 checks passed
@sjd78 sjd78 deleted the sjd78-patch-1 branch March 6, 2024 21:28
@sjd78
Copy link
Member Author

sjd78 commented Mar 6, 2024

Another followup -- The registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/nodejs-18:latest image was upgraded on March 5 to version 1-98. This includes an upgrade of npm from 9.8.1 to 10.2.3. This changes appears to be the cause of the nofiles size error.

Running the build locally with podman will encounter the EMFILE error without adding --ulimit=nofile=4096:4096 to the build command.

Running the build with the previous image release :1-88 does not encounter the EMFILE error locally or in github actions.

sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2024
Apply github actions changes to the release-0.3 branch:
  - konveyor#1759
  - konveyor#1746

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
ibolton336 added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 15, 2024
Apply github actions changes to the release-0.3 branch:
  - #1759
  - #1746

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Ian Bolton <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request Mar 16, 2024
Ever since the build container we use [1] updated to use
`npm@10`, the image builder github action has encountered
a number of problems. The first was solved with konveyor#1746.
The second more random problem has been with network
connections erroring out when installing dependencies.

To work around the network error, force the build to use `npm@9`.

Alternative solutions:
  - Add the force to `npm@9`` directly in the Dockerfile for use
    in all circumstances

  - Use the `:1-88` version of the build container instead of
    `:latest`

  - Find a way to use something like verdaccio to proxy/mirror
    the npmjs repo during the build so npmjs fetches can be
    pooled across the parallel image builds

[1] registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/nodejs-18:latest

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request Mar 19, 2024
Ever since the build container we use [1] updated to use
`npm@10`, the image builder github action has encountered
a number of problems. The first was solved with konveyor#1746.
The second more random problem has been with network
connections erroring out when installing dependencies.

To work around the network error, force the build to use `npm@9`.

Alternative solutions:
  - Add the force to `npm@9`` directly in the Dockerfile for use
    in all circumstances

  - Use the `:1-88` version of the build container instead of
    `:latest`

  - Find a way to use something like verdaccio to proxy/mirror
    the npmjs repo during the build so npmjs fetches can be
    pooled across the parallel image builds

[1] registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/nodejs-18:latest

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 19, 2024
Ever since the build container we use [1][2] updated to use `npm@10`,
the image builder github action has encountered a number of problems.
The first was solved with #1746. The second more random problem has been
with network connections erroring out when installing dependencies.

To work around the network and nofiles errors:
  1. enforce the use of `npm@9`
  2. pin the Dockerfile base images to specific version tags;
    builder at `:1-88`, and runtime at `:1-93`

Additional solutions:
  - Add the force to `npm@9` directly in the Dockerfile for use in all
    circumstances
  - Find a way to use something like verdaccio to proxy/mirror the npmjs
    repo during the build so npmjs fetches can be pooled across the parallel
    image builds

[1] registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/nodejs-18:latest
[2] https://catalog.redhat.com/software/containers/ubi9/nodejs-18/62e8e7ed22d1d3c2dfe2ca01

---------

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 19, 2024
Ever since the build container we use [1][2] updated to use `npm@10`,
the image builder github action has encountered a number of problems.
The first was solved with #1746. The second more random problem has been
with network connections erroring out when installing dependencies.

To work around the network and nofiles errors:
  1. enforce the use of `npm@9`
  2. pin the Dockerfile base images to specific version tags;
    builder at `:1-88`, and runtime at `:1-93`

Additional solutions:
  - Add the force to `npm@9` directly in the Dockerfile for use in all
    circumstances
  - Find a way to use something like verdaccio to proxy/mirror the npmjs
    repo during the build so npmjs fetches can be pooled across the parallel
    image builds

[1] registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/nodejs-18:latest
[2] https://catalog.redhat.com/software/containers/ubi9/nodejs-18/62e8e7ed22d1d3c2dfe2ca01

---------

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Cherry Picker <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 19, 2024
Ever since the build container we use [1][2] updated to use `npm@10`,
the image builder github action has encountered a number of problems.
The first was solved with #1746. The second more random problem has been
with network connections erroring out when installing dependencies.

To work around the network and nofiles errors:
  1. enforce the use of `npm@9`
  2. pin the Dockerfile base images to specific version tags;
    builder at `:1-88`, and runtime at `:1-93`

Additional solutions:
  - Add the force to `npm@9` directly in the Dockerfile for use in all
    circumstances
  - Find a way to use something like verdaccio to proxy/mirror the npmjs
    repo during the build so npmjs fetches can be pooled across the parallel
    image builds

[1] registry.access.redhat.com/ubi9/nodejs-18:latest
[2] https://catalog.redhat.com/software/containers/ubi9/nodejs-18/62e8e7ed22d1d3c2dfe2ca01

---------

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Cherry Picker <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Cherry Picker <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Scott Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile`, then run image builds
for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any `Dockerfile` change
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

In future, it may be reasonable to extend this check
to happen when other core build related changes are
made (package-lock.json, package.json).

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 13, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes
a change to the `Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then
run image builds for all of our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes
will not cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow
to break.  Doing the image build here should show up most
problems much earlier.  For example, a npm version update
in the build container could break github action `nofiles`
or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of
when this check could have caught issues before a PR
merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 14, 2024
If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes a change to the
`Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then run image builds for all of
our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes will not
cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow to break. Doing the
image build here should reveal most problems much earlier. For example,
a npm version update in the build container could break github action
`nofiles` or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See #1742, #1746, and #1781 for some other examples of when this check
could have caught issues before a PR merge.

Supports: #1883

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 15, 2024
…ange (konveyor#1907)

If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes a change to the
`Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then run image builds for all of
our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes will not
cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow to break. Doing the
image build here should reveal most problems much earlier. For example,
a npm version update in the build container could break github action
`nofiles` or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of when this check
could have caught issues before a PR merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883
Backport-of: konveyor#1907

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit to sjd78/tackle2-ui that referenced this pull request May 15, 2024
…ange (konveyor#1907)

If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes a change to the
`Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then run image builds for all of
our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes will not
cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow to break. Doing the
image build here should reveal most problems much earlier. For example,
a npm version update in the build container could break github action
`nofiles` or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See konveyor#1742, konveyor#1746, and konveyor#1781 for some other examples of when this check
could have caught issues before a PR merge.

Supports: konveyor#1883
Backport-of: konveyor#1907

Note: build architectures updated to match the settings on the
      backport target branch

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 15, 2024
…ange (#1907) (#1914)

If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes a change to the
`Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then run image builds for all of
our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes will not
cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow to break. Doing the
image build here should reveal most problems much earlier. For example,
a npm version update in the build container could break github action
`nofiles` or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See #1742, #1746, and #1781 for some other examples of when this check
could have caught issues before a PR merge.

Supports: #1883
Backport-of: #1907

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
sjd78 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 15, 2024
…ange (#1907) (#1915)

If the workflow is run from a PR, and the PR includes a change to the
`Dockerfile` or `package-lock.json`, then run image builds for all of
our target platforms.

The images are built but not pushed to any repository.

We want to be reasonably sure that any major build file changes will not
cause the image-build-and-push on PR merge workflow to break. Doing the
image build here should reveal most problems much earlier. For example,
a npm version update in the build container could break github action
`nofiles` or network access capabilities for the npm install.

See #1742, #1746, and #1781 for some other examples of when this check
could have caught issues before a PR merge.

Supports: #1883
Backport-of: #1907

Note: build architectures updated to match the settings on the backport
target branch

Signed-off-by: Scott J Dickerson <[email protected]>
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.

1 participant