Skip to content

Conversation

@kou
Copy link
Member

@kou kou commented Mar 9, 2024

Rationale for this change

If we use GitHub hosted M1 macOS runner instead of self-hosted M1 macOS runner, we don't need to maintain self-hosted M1 macOS runner.

What changes are included in this PR?

Use GitHub hosted M1 macOS runner except r-binary-packages's r-packages job. It uses macOS 11 but GitHub hosted M1 macOS runner is 13 or 14.

Are these changes tested?

Yes.

Are there any user-facing changes?

No.

@kou kou requested review from assignUser and raulcd as code owners March 9, 2024 22:12
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 9, 2024

⚠️ GitHub issue #40077 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review label Mar 9, 2024
@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 9, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit java-jars wheel-macos-*-arm64 r-binary-packages

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 9, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit verify-rc-source-*-macos-arm64

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 9, 2024

Can we use macos-13-arm64 or macos-14-arm64 to verify RC of wheels?

arrow/dev/tasks/tasks.yml

Lines 1007 to 1014 in 6a7a6ee

verify-rc-binaries-wheels-macos-11-arm64:
ci: github
template: verify-rc/github.macos.arm64.yml
params:
env:
PYTEST_ADDOPTS: "-k 'not test_cancellation'"
github_runner: ["self-hosted", "macOS", "arm64"]
target: "wheels"

Is macos-11 important here?

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit java-jars wheel-macos--arm64 r-binary-packages verify-rc-source--macos-arm64

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@assignUser
Copy link
Member

Imo I think we can drop the self hosted M1 for r-binary-packages as well, then we can retire the runner completely. It don't recall ever having an issue with the package related to the macos version (and x86 is even run on macos 13). The issues are usually with the environment setup (e.g. gnu libtool being on the path etc.)

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

OK. Let's try with GitHub hosted runner.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit java-jars wheel-macos-big-sur-cp310-arm64 r-binary-packages verify-rc-source-cpp-macos-arm64

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos-big-sur-cp310-* r-binary-packages

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos-big-sur-cp310-* r-binary-packages

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos--cp310-

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos--cp310-

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos--cp310-

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@assignUser Could you check the artifacts of https://github.com/ursacomputing/crossbow/actions/runs/8220036683 ? It uses GitHub hosted runners.

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos--cp310-

@github-actions

This comment was marked as outdated.

@pitrou
Copy link
Member

pitrou commented Mar 10, 2024

Could we also add a PR C++ job on macOS ARM64? (or perhaps as a separate PR)

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

Hmm. It seems that we need #40418 for the wheel failures.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 10, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos--cp38-

@github-actions
Copy link

Revision: a9db9da71dd94785eaa01fffbe7a0c2ec045f996

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-d07c449d1f

Task Status
wheel-macos-big-sur-cp38-arm64 GitHub Actions
wheel-macos-catalina-cp38-amd64 GitHub Actions

@pitrou
Copy link
Member

pitrou commented Mar 10, 2024

I suppose the "install packages" step in the arm64 wheel builds will get faster once vcpkg results are cached?

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 11, 2024

I suppose the "install packages" step in the arm64 wheel builds will get faster once vcpkg results are cached?

Yes. The previous arm64 template doesn't use NuGet based cache but I unified amd64/arm64 templates in this PR. So the arm64 template can also use NuGet based cache. It'll reduce build time.

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 11, 2024

Should we wait for #40418 before we merge this?

@pitrou
Copy link
Member

pitrou commented Mar 11, 2024

I think it would be better to wait for #40418.

@kou kou force-pushed the ci-java-jars-macos-arm64-hosted branch from a9db9da to de8ae54 Compare March 13, 2024 08:09
@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 13, 2024

@github-actions crossbow submit wheel-macos-*-arm64

@github-actions
Copy link

Revision: de8ae54

Submitted crossbow builds: ursacomputing/crossbow @ actions-7a78f0a41d

Task Status
wheel-macos-big-sur-cp310-arm64 GitHub Actions
wheel-macos-big-sur-cp311-arm64 GitHub Actions
wheel-macos-big-sur-cp312-arm64 GitHub Actions
wheel-macos-big-sur-cp38-arm64 GitHub Actions
wheel-macos-big-sur-cp39-arm64 GitHub Actions

@kou
Copy link
Member Author

kou commented Mar 14, 2024

Green. I'll merge this.

@kou kou merged commit 7d290bd into apache:main Mar 14, 2024
@kou kou deleted the ci-java-jars-macos-arm64-hosted branch March 14, 2024 01:29
@kou kou removed the awaiting committer review Awaiting committer review label Mar 14, 2024
@conbench-apache-arrow
Copy link

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 5 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 7d290bd.

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 2 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.

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.

3 participants