You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We have observed long build times, usually due to ccache invalidation/not being populated. For the latter the theory is that having three machines may be actively working against ccache since for a given build only two of the three machines would be used (so the third will not have an updated ccache cache).
I'm going to take the second IBM hosted release machine offline, leaving one Digital Ocean hosted and one IBM hosted machine. For now we'll keep both labels on both machines, but reserve the option to pin each of the remaining machines to one of the build types.
I've been having a look at utilising rthis system for hosting an Alpine container. I'm in two minds between doing this with podman on the existing RHEL host (which will require changes to the playbooks and probably building/starting as a non-root user such as iojs) or reinstalling with Ubuntu and using docker.
At the moment the machine is quite restricted on disk space (particularly with the ccache) so we may need to rebuild anyway, or at least add additional space for the containers, so I'm perhaps leaning down the reinstall route to retain consistency with the other dockerhost systems that we have.
I am currently provisioning release-ibm-ubuntu2404_docker-x64-1 to host an Alpine 3.23 container release-alpine323_container-x64-1.
This will likely mean that we can just delete the release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 once everything is verifed as working. Noting that we got through the last set of releases last week, including the security releases, without the release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 system.
With the addition of xz to the Dockerfile the new Alpine release machine looks ok and gets as far as trying to copy to node-www which it can't because the firewall rules aren't set up yet.
Alpine machine now fully set up, working and has performed a release. release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 can likely be decommissioned now and then I think we're done with this issue.
Activity
richardlau commentedon Jul 2, 2026
release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 now marked offline.
sxa commentedon Jul 29, 2026
I've been having a look at utilising rthis system for hosting an Alpine container. I'm in two minds between doing this with podman on the existing RHEL host (which will require changes to the playbooks and probably building/starting as a non-root user such as
iojs) or reinstalling with Ubuntu and using docker.At the moment the machine is quite restricted on disk space (particularly with the ccache) so we may need to rebuild anyway, or at least add additional space for the containers, so I'm perhaps leaning down the reinstall route to retain consistency with the other dockerhost systems that we have.
sxa commentedon Aug 5, 2026
I am currently provisioning release-ibm-ubuntu2404_docker-x64-1 to host an Alpine 3.23 container release-alpine323_container-x64-1.
This will likely mean that we can just delete the release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 once everything is verifed as working. Noting that we got through the last set of releases last week, including the security releases, without the release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 system.
Related PR: #4414
sxa commentedon Aug 12, 2026
With the addition of xz to the Dockerfile the new Alpine release machine looks ok and gets as far as trying to copy to
node-wwwwhich it can't because the firewall rules aren't set up yet.sxa commentedon Aug 27, 2026
Alpine machine now fully set up, working and has performed a release. release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 can likely be decommissioned now and then I think we're done with this issue.
richardlau commentedon Sep 23, 2026
I'm going to replace release-ibm-rhel8-x64-2 with a RHEL 9 x64 release machine.