Hacktoberfest 2026: le issue che i maintainer hanno segnato per ottobre, aperte e adatte ai principianti. Sfoglia le issue Hacktoberfest

Cutting CI build times: prebuilt Arrow and build configuration

Aperta
  • Qualcosa non va?
#799 2 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
5/5
Tempo stimato
Più di una settimana
Idoneità per principianti
35/100
Tipo di issue
Refactoring
Chiarezza
Da chiarire
Stato di attività
Tranquilla
Stack tecnologico
cmake, cpp, github-actions
Ambito
build-system, ci-cd, performance

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia leggendo i workflow GitHub Actions esistenti, cpp-linter.yml, il file toolchain di CMake e le misurazioni del fork descritte nell’issue. Confronta le proposte relative alla configurazione di Arrow, al build-flavor, alla configurazione di Windows, al trigger e a sccache con la matrice attuale. Il lavoro è completato quando è stato implementato un sottoinsieme concordato di modifiche e la matrice completa di build e test conferma la copertura prevista e i miglioramenti nei tempi di CI.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

I have some CI changes I'd like to propose. They go a bit deeper than the recent caching work, so I wanted to open an issue first to align on direction before pursuing any of them. The pieces below are independent; taking forward only some of them works fine.

Resolving Arrow from conda-forge

Eleven jobs build the vendored Arrow and Parquet from source, but the toolchain already prefers a prebuilt one (the FetchContent declaration uses FIND_PACKAGE_ARGS); CI just never installs one. Installing libarrow and libparquet from conda-forge with setup-miniconda (ASF allowlisted) takes that compile out of each leg:

Test leg Build targets Cold build step
Ubuntu 951 to 606 21 to 16 min
macOS 946 to 602 11 to 8 min
Windows 900 to 578 47 to 35 min

(fork measurements; times vary with runner load, target counts don't; the AWS, SQL catalog, sanitizer, and linter legs shrink similarly)

It is also most of our cache pressure: one push to main saves around 10 GB of sccache entries, more than the repository's 10 GB limit by itself, so eviction ends up deleting entries that have no newer replacement. Over the past week about every third push to main rebuilt at least one leg from scratch. With prebuilt Arrow, and without debug info that nothing in CI reads, saves drop under 3 GB.

Coverage holds: the AWS leg keeps building the bundled AWS SDK from source, the Meson legs don't use Arrow, and the sanitizer leg passes against the non-instrumented Arrow. The conda pin would track the version in the toolchain file and bump in the same PR.

Building one library flavor per leg

CI builds with ICEBERG_BUILD_STATIC and ICEBERG_BUILD_SHARED both ON, and the two targets compile the same sources twice (the shared build adds the export define and hidden visibility, so objects can't be reused). The tests link one flavor, so building one roughly halves what a leg compiles of our own code. A static-only fork run passes the full build and test matrix; one leg could keep both ON to keep both exercised.

Windows: build Debug like the other legs

The Unix test legs build Debug; Windows builds Release and has been the slowest leg fairly consistently. MSVC Debug needs embedded debug info (/Z7 via CMP0141) for sccache to cache the objects, and that combination is green on a fork. Windows is currently the only Release build in CI, though, so this is partly a question of what the matrix should cover.

Two smaller cleanups

The test workflows trigger on both push (all branches) and pull_request, and the concurrency groups key on different refs per event, so a branch pushed here with an open PR runs everything twice. Scoping push to main, as cpp-linter.yml already does, drops the duplicates and keeps the post-merge runs that seed the caches. Separately, the sccache steps are copy-pasted across nine jobs in five workflow files; a composite action under .github/actions/ would hold them (and the conda setup) in one place.

Questions

  • Is conda-forge acceptable as a source of prebuilt Arrow in CI, and how would you want the version pin maintained?
  • Single flavor on the test legs: which one, and is it enough to keep one leg building both static and shared?
  • Windows on Debug: fine, or should the matrix keep a Release leg?
  • Any concerns with the composite action or the push trigger scoping?
Lingua principale
C++
Stelle
223
Fork
127
Merge medio
1g 13h
PR unite (30g)
28

Preparare l'ambiente

Non abbiamo ancora controllato i file di configurazione di questo progetto. Parti dal suo README e consulta la nostra guida al primo contributo per i passaggi generali.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di apache/iceberg-cpp

Tutte le issue di apache/iceberg-cpp

Issue simili

Altre issue su C++

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.