Run actions/cache@v4 step in functional tests spams thousands of log lines
#7790
Comments
willdavsmith
added
the
maintenance
|
👋 @willdavsmith Thanks for filing this issue. A project maintainer will review this issue and get back to you soon. We also welcome community contributions! If you would like to pick this item up sooner and submit a pull request, please visit our contribution guidelines and assign this to yourself by commenting "/assign" on this issue. For more information on our triage process please visit our triage overview |
|
👍 We've reviewed this issue and have agreed to add it to our backlog. Please subscribe to this issue for notifications, we'll provide updates when we pick it up. We also welcome community contributions! If you would like to pick this item up sooner and submit a pull request, please visit our contribution guidelines and assign this to yourself by commenting "/assign" on this issue. For more information on our triage process please visit our triage overview |
# Description Because the cache already exists on the GitHub runners we use, disabling cache in the setup-go steps of our CI/CD pipelines is expected solve the issue of seeing bunch of logs that say "**cannot open: file exists**". The official documentation of setup-go and the part that is relevant: https://github.com/actions/setup-go#caching-dependency-files-and-build-outputs. This points out that setup-go does caching for us. If the cache is already there, we will get all the logs in our workflows. There is no disadvantage of this approach, as far as I know, since the cache is already there. I actually ran into this [comment](actions/setup-go#403 (comment)) that says that disabling cache in setup-go step improved the speed of the said step. We can always update our workflows if we see any other disadvantages. Our runners: https://github.com/radius-project/radius/actions/runners. References: - actions/setup-go#403 - actions/setup-go#403 (comment) - actions/setup-go#314 (comment) ## Type of change - This pull request fixes a bug in Radius and has an approved issue (issue link required). Fixes: #7790 ## Contributor checklist Please verify that the PR meets the following requirements, where applicable: - [ ] An overview of proposed schema changes is included in a linked GitHub issue. - [ ] A design document PR is created in the [design-notes repository](https://github.com/radius-project/design-notes/), if new APIs are being introduced. - [ ] If applicable, design document has been reviewed and approved by Radius maintainers/approvers. - [ ] A PR for the [samples repository](https://github.com/radius-project/samples) is created, if existing samples are affected by the changes in this PR. - [ ] A PR for the [documentation repository](https://github.com/radius-project/docs) is created, if the changes in this PR affect the documentation or any user facing updates are made. - [ ] A PR for the [recipes repository](https://github.com/radius-project/recipes) is created, if existing recipes are affected by the changes in this PR. Signed-off-by: ytimocin <[email protected]>
Area for Improvement
In the functional tests, the actions/cache@v4 step spams a lot of log lines and shows errors with
cannot open: file exists.https://github.com/radius-project/radius/actions/runs/10309121192/job/28538144812
Observed behavior
No response
Desired behavior
We should figure out what this step is doing and how to fix it
Proposed Fix
No response
rad Version
any
Operating system
No response
Additional context
No response
Would you like to support us?
AB#12954
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: