Re: [GSoC] Rewrite Hydra to be more integrated with Guix.

[Ludovic Courtès]

Andreas Enge <address@hidden> skribis:

> In the end, I think it would be interesting to not use the offload approach,
> where the offloading machine sends all inputs to the build machine, which
> returns the result, so that more or less the complete set of binary packages
> flows along the tree of build machines to the root and the other way round.
> (As I recently understood during discussions with Ludovic, currently we have
> a tree of height one: hydra is the root and all build machines are the leaves;
> but the offloading mechanism could transparently work with trees of bigger
> height, where hydra offloads to a root of a smaller build cluster, which
> itself offloads to one of its subordinate build machines. And so on. The same
> thing would also work in the Debian setting, assuming that build requests
> come from the leaves and are forwarded towards the root, while a work package
> is handed down the other way.) Now it would be interesting if machines just
> got build jobs (or made requests) and looked for the necessary inputs inside
> a big magma/cloud/gnunet/ipfs/mirror network, compiled the package, and
> dropped the result into the same magma. Already in our current set-up, it
> would be useful if hydra need not send the build inputs, but build machines
> could just fetch them from an arbitrary nginx mirror, where they are cached.

I agree.  However, I think there are a lot of unknowns, which makes it
unsuitable for a GSoC project.

That’s why I was suggesting that Mathieu do not consider workload
distribution (meaning we would keep using the existing offload
mechanism) as part of this project.

Ludo’.