I know well Jenkins free-style jobs, but I'm new to pipelines.
I'm reworking some validation pipelines to add a manual step/pause before the final publication/diffusion step.
I've read about the input directive, but it's not what we want.
Our need is to be able to run the same pipeline several (10) times with different parameters, and afterwards, make a manual check on some or all the runs, eventually update some repports. Then go on with downstream operations (basically officially publish the reports, for QA team or others).
I used to do such things easily with free-style jobs, and manual promotions (restricted to authorized users). It's safe because all the build artefacts are saved at the end of the free-style job, and can be post-processed later.
Is there a way to achieve such thing in a pipeline ? (adding properties / promotions)
A key point for us is that the same pipeline job should be run several time, so each time the artefacts should be stored in a different location/workspace.
I used the input directive. It's expecting an interractive input.
If I launch the same job again, I'm afraid it will use the same workspace.
I added a free-style job, triggered after the pipeline job.
in this job, I retrieve the artefacts from the first job. The promotion does the job, but it's quite ugly implementation.
I tried to add a promotion using properties + promotions, but I'm not sure if I can do the same thing as a manual promotion in a free-style job. That's what I would like to do, to keep all things in the pipeline.
I have searched for some time, but I did not found much about it.
I have read some things like
https://issues.jenkins.io/browse/JENKINS-36089
or
https://www.jenkins.io/projects/gsoc/2019/artifact-promotion-plugin-for-jenkins-pipeline/
which say it's not possible.
But I'm sure some people have the same need, so some solutions should exist.
I am currently learning the ins and outs of Jenkins and Pipeline.
One thing I do not yet understand is the following:
A Jenkins job by default can be executed concurrently (I can check the checkbox "Do not allow concurrent builds" if I don't want that).
What I don't understand is the following:
Let say Jenkins checks out code in /var/lib/jenkins/workspace/my-project-workspace/
Now how would it be possible to run concurrent builds without conflicts?
Let's say that build nr 1 checks out code in that path and starts testing it, and while doing that, build nr 2 is started and checks out code in that same path.
How will that not conflict with build nr 1?
I am probably missing something obvious here... Please help :)
The subdirectory inside the workspace/ folder will not always be your project name, but a (randomly) generated directory name. That's all the magic.
When this option is checked, multiple builds of this project may be executed in parallel.
By default, only a single build of a project is executed at a time — any other requests to start building that project will remain in the build queue until the first build is complete.
This is a safe default, as projects can often require exclusive access to certain resources, such as a database, or a piece of hardware.
But with this option enabled, if there are enough build executors available that can handle this project, then multiple builds of this project will take place in parallel. If there are not enough available executors at any point, any further build requests will be held in the build queue as normal.
Enabling concurrent builds is useful for projects that execute lengthy test suites, as it allows each build to contain a smaller number of changes, while the total turnaround time decreases as subsequent builds do not need to wait for previous test runs to complete.
This feature is also useful for parameterized projects, whose individual build executions — depending on the parameters used — can be completely independent from one another.
Each concurrently executed build occurs in its own build workspace, isolated from any other builds. By default, Jenkins appends "#" to the workspace directory name, e.g. "#2".
The separator "#" can be changed by setting the hudson.slaves.WorkspaceList Java system property when starting Jenkins. For example, "hudson.slaves.WorkspaceList=-" would change the separator to a hyphen.
For more information on setting system properties, see the wiki page.
However, if you enable the Use custom workspace option, all builds will be executed in the same workspace. Therefore caution is required, as multiple builds may end up altering the same directory at the same time. enter image description here
I've noticed that there seems to be a build queue limit of one in Jenkins. When I trigger a lot of builds it seems to only place a max of one build in the build queue. Is there a way to remove this limit so there can be more then one build in the build queue?
This is intended behaviour:
Normally, your jobs will depend on some input (from SCM, or from some upstream jobs)
If your slave capacity is too low to catch up with each and every build, then you'd normally want to test/build/... only the very latest "item".
This is the default behaviour. Without that, there'd be a risk that the build queue grows indefinitely.
On top of that, Jenkins does not track the properties of normal build requests -- they all look the same, and Jenkins can not (for example) separate different SCM states that existed at different triggering times.
This is however exactly the point that gives you a workaround: parameterize your jobs, and then use for example the Trigger parameterized build on other projects post-build action to trigger those. Then Jenkins will queue each build request individually -- and inside your job, you can use the parameter to find out what exactly has to be done.
Jenkins will squash queued parameterized builds that have identical parameter values (thanks to user "atline" for checking).
Using Jenkins, I am running 2 builds (Linux+Windows) and one Doxygen job
At the moment, I am using 3 separate SCM polling triggers pointing to the same source code
How can I use a single trigger for all three jobs provided that I still want to get separate statuses
For the record; the underlying SCM is Git
Off the top of my head, some solutions which might do what you are looking for:
Instead of setting an SCM trigger, use a post-receive hook in your repository, which can send a signal for Jenkins that there are new changes (see: https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Git+Plugin#GitPlugin-Pushnotificationfromrepository). This way Jenkins doesn't have to constantly poll the repository (multiple times for the different jobs), and the trigger would be faster, since there is no waiting for the next polling, but when there is a push, a build will be started.
Use an extra job, that would do nothing else, just have the SCM polling trigger, and start all three original jobs (without waiting for any of them to finish).
If the configuration is similar for all three jobs, you could consider creating a single project with a matrix configuration. Roughly what it does, is that you could have a variable for the build type, with values like linux, windows, doxygen. When the job is triggered, it would start multiple builds with all the possible values - of course you would have to set up the job in a way that the current parameter changes the build process according to what needs to be done. Actually I haven't had to use a matrix configuration yet, so my example may be not the best, but you can probably find lots of examples on the Jenkins wiki, if you think this is a good direction.
Why are there two kinds of jobs for Jenkins, both the multi-configuration project and the free-style project project? I read somewhere that once you choose one of them, you can't convert to the other (easily). Why wouldn't I always pick the multi-configuration project in order to be safe for future changes?
I would like to setup a build for a project building both on Windows and Unix (and other platforms as well). I found this question), which asks the same thing, but I don't really get the answer. Why would I need three matrix projects (and not three free-style projects), one for each platform? Why can't I keep them all in one matrix, with platforms AND (for example) gcc version on one axis and (my) software versions on the other?
I also read this blog post, but that builds everything on the same machine, with just different Python versions.
So, in short: how do most people configure a multi-configuration project targeting many different platforms?
The two types of jobs have separate functions:
Free-style jobs: these allow you to build your project on a single computer or label (group of computers, for eg "Windows-XP-32").
Multi-configuration jobs: these allow you to build your project on multiple computers or labels, or a mix of the two, for eg Windows-XP, Windows-Vista, Windows-7 and RedHat - useful for checking compatibility or building for multiple platforms (qt programs?)
If you have a project which you want to build on Windows & Unix, you have two options:
Create a separate free-style job for each configuration, in which case you have to maintain each one individually
You have one multi-configuration job, and you select 2 (or more) labels/computers/slaves - 1 for Windows and 1 for Unix. In this case, you only have to maintain one job for the build
You can keep the your gcc versions on one axis, and software versions on another. There is no reason you should not be able to.
The question that you link has a fair point, but one that does not relate to your question directly: in his case, he had a multi-configuration job A, which - on success - triggered another job B. Now, in a multi-configuration job, if one of the configuration fails, the entire job fails (obviously, since you want your project to build successfully on all your configurations).
IMHO, for building the same project on multiple platforms, the better way to go is to use a multi-configuration style job.
Another option is to use a python build step to check the current OS and then call an appropriate setup or build script. In the python script, you can save the updated environment to a file and inject the environment again using the EnvInject plugin for subsequent build steps. Depending on the size of your build environment, you could also use a multi-platform build tool like SCons.
You could create a script (e.g. build) and a batch file (e.g. build.bat) that get checked in with your source code. In Jenkins in your build step you can call $WORKSPACE/build - Windows will execute build.bat whereas Linux will run build.
An option is to use user-defined axis combined with slaves(windows, linux, ...), so you need to add a filter for each combination and use the Conditional BuildStep Plugin to set the build step specific for each plataform(Executar shell, Windows command, ...)
This link has a tutorial but it is in portuguese, but it's easy to work it out based on image...
http://manhadalasanha.wordpress.com/2013/06/20/projeto-de-multiplas-configuracoes-matrix-no-jenkins/
You could use the variable that jenkins create when you define a configuration matrix axis. For example:
You create a slave axis with name OSTYPE and check the two slaves (Windows and Linux). Then you create two separate build steps and check for the OSTYPE environment variable.
You could use a improved script language instead, like python, which is multi-platform and can achieve the same functionality independent of the slaves' name and in just one build step.
If you go the matrix route with Windows and something else, you'll want the XShell plugin. You just create your two build scripts such as "build.bat" for cmd and "build" for bash, and tell XShell to run "build". The right one will be run in each case.
A hack to have batch files run on Windows and shell scripts on Unix:
On Unix, make batch files exit with 0 exit status:
ln -s /bin/true /bin/cmd
On Windows, either find a true.exe, name it sh.exe and place it somewhere in the PATH.
Alternatively, if you have any sh.exe installed on Windows (From Cygwin, Git, or other source), add this to the top of the shell script in Jenkins:
[ -n "$WINDIR" ] && exit 0
Why wouldn't you always pick the multi-configuration job type?
Some reasons come to mind:
Because jobs should be easy to create and configure. If it is hard to configure any job in your environment, you are probably doing something wrong outside the scope of the jenkins job. If you are happy that you managed to create that one job and it finally runs, and you are reluctant to do this whole work again, that's where you should try to improve.
Because multi configuration jobs are more complex. They usually require you to think about both the main job and the different sub job variables, and they tend to grow in complexity to a level beyond being manageable. So in a single job scenario, you'd probably waste thoughts on not using that complexity, and when extending the build variables, things might grow in the wrong direction. I'd suggest using the simple jobs as default, and the multi configuration jobs only if there is a need for multiple configurations.
Because executing multi configuration jobs might need more job slots on the slaves than single jobs. There will always be a master job that is executed on a special, invisible slot (that's no problem by itself) and triggers the sub jobs, but if these sub jobs do themselves trigger sub jobs, you might easily end in a deadlock if there are more sub jobs than slots, and some sub jobs trigger again sub jobs that then cannot execute because there are no more open slots. This problem might be circumvented by using some configuration setup on the slaves, but it is present and might only occur if several multi jobs run concurrently.
So in essence: The multi configuration job is a more complex thing, and because complexity should be avoided unless necessary, the regular freestyle job is a better default.
If you want to select on which slave you run the job, you need to use multi-configuration project (otherwise you won't be able to select/limit slaves on which you run it – there are three ways to do it, however I've tried them all (Tie plugin works only for master job, Restrict in Advanced Project Options is not rock-safe trigger as well so you want to use Slave axis that is proven to work correctly today.)