Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

Tamás Cservenák
Hi there,

just a shot in a dark: Have you tried any of the existing stuff, like
Takari Lifecycle before modding Maven itself? (
http://takari.io/book/40-lifecycle.html)

Thanks,
T

On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46 PM Maximilian Novikov <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
>
> *We want to create upstream change to Maven* to support true incremental
> build for big-sized projects.
>
> To raise a pull request we have to pass long chain of Deutsche Bank’s
> internal procedures. So, *before starting the process we would like to
> get your feedback regarding this feature*.
>
>
>
> *Motivation:*
>
>
>
> Our project is hosted in mono-repo and contains ~600 modules. All modules
> has the same SNAPSHOT version.
>
> There are lot of test automation around this, everything is tested before
> merge into release branch.
>
>
>
> Current setup helps us to simplify build/release/dependency management for
> 10+ teams those contribute into codebase. We can release everything in
> 1-click.
>
> The major drawback of such approach is build time: *full local build took
> 45-60 min (*-T8)*, CI build ~25min(*-T16*)*.
>
>
>
> To speed-up our build we needed 2 features: incremental build and shared
> cache.
>
> Initially we started to think about migration to Gradle or Bazel. As
> migration costs for the mentioned tools were too high, we decided to add
> similar functionality into Maven.
>
>
>
> Current results we get: *1-2 mins for local build(*-T8*)* if build was
> cached by CI*, CI build ~5 mins (*-T16*).*
>
>
>
> *Feature description:*
>
>
>
> The idea is to calculate checksum for inputs and save outputs in cache.
>
> [image: image2019-8-27_20-0-14.png]
>
> Each node checksum calculated with:
>
>
>
> ·         Effective POM hash
>
> ·         Sources hash
>
> ·         Dependencies hash (dependencies within multi-module project)
>
>
>
> Project sources inputs are searched inside project + all paths from
> plugins configuration:
>
> [image: image2019-8-30_10-28-56.png]
>
> How does it work in practice:
>
>
>
> 1.       CI: runs builds and stores outputs in shared cache
>
> 2.       CI: reuse outputs for same inputs, so time is decreasing
>
> 3.       Locally: when I checkout branch and run ‘install’ for whole
> project, I get all actual snapshots from remote cache for this branch
>
> 4.       Locally: if I change multiple modules in tree, only changed
> subtree is rebuilt
>
>
>
> Impact on current Maven codebase is very localized (MojoExecutor, where we
> injected cache controller).
>
> Caching can be activated/deactivated by property, so current maven flow
> will work as is.
>
>
>
> And the big plus is that you don’t need to re-work your current project.
> Caching should work out of box, just need to add config in .mvn folder.
>
>
>
> Please let us know what do you think. We are ready to invest in this
> feature and address any further feedback.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Max
>
>
>
>
> ---
> This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
> are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
> please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any
> unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
> e-mail is strictly forbidden.
>
> Please refer to https://www.db.com/disclosures for additional EU
> corporate and regulatory disclosures and to
> http://www.db.com/unitedkingdom/content/privacy.htm for information about
> privacy.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

Enrico Olivelli
I feel that in general having an huge monolithic project is kind of a
project-smell.
Btw I have some big project with 100+ modules so I can see your pain.
In the daywork experience a single developer doesn't work on all of the
modules but usually you touch 1-2 modules and maybe some integration/system
test.
If you need to rebuild the full project for every change maybe there is
something wrong with the overall design.

I think you have you motivations for your layout, so let's talk about your
proposal.

If you have a way to split your project in subsystems you can use some
shared remote repository for deploying snapshots in order to share
intermediate results with other developers

If your goal is to be ready for releases I don't get your point. Usually
you work with snapshots and for a release you have to rebuild one time and
only once the full codebase in order to ensure that you a consistent build
of the project.
With all of this kind of temporary caches how do you ensure that the final
artifacts are the intended ones?


Beside note: this is not a real VOTE thread

Just my 2 cents

don't get me wrong, I admire your will to improve Maven ecosystem with this
cool feature! Thank you for contribution your work. We will try to get the
best

Enrico

Il sab 14 set 2019, 08:29 Laird Nelson <[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:01 PM Alexander Ashitkin <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > This feature is true incremental build – you don’t build modules which
> > were not changed at all and build only modified/changed ones.
> >
>
> Suppose module B depends on module A and I change A.  Does B get rebuilt in
> your system?
>
> Best,
> Laird
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

Romain Manni-Bucau
In reply to this post by Tamás Cservenák
Tibor, maven is the only one with the logic to give any cache the data it
needs. Jenkins alone can't since it does not own the reactor nor plugin I/O
values.

Le sam. 14 sept. 2019 à 12:45, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> a
écrit :

> But I do not understand why the Maven should be responsible for the project
> cahe control/management of "/target" directories.
> It is a responsibility of the build manager which is the Jenkins.
> The Jenkins has the ability to archive files and such property already
> exists in the Jenkins.
>
> So the Jenkins has a full knowledge about:
>
> 1. how long the workspace content retains intact
> 2. what commit hash is for the last build/job/branch
> 3. and what commit was successful
>
> If the target directories retain intact (or renewed from archive) in the
> workspace for very long time and the workspace was reused by the next build
> then I would say that the improvement should work as it is on CI level.
>
> Maybe what is necessary is only that improvement in Maven where we would
> obtain the list of modules or directories of changes in the current commit.
> Then the Maven can highly optimize its own build steps and build only those
> modules which have been changed and their dependent modules.
> So the interface between CI and Maven is needed in a kind of extension or
> the class MavenCli can be extended with some new entrypoint.
>
> But I do not hink that Maven has to take care of responsibilities of CI
> (project cache mgmt), that's not our task I would say and we as Maven would
> never know all about the miscellaneous CI specifics and therefore we would
> not cope with CI related troubles.
>
> Cheers
> Tibor17
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:08 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 23:37:15 +0200, Romain Manni-Bucau
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > There are multiple possible incremental support:
> > >
> > > 1. Scm related: do a status and rebuild downstream reactor
> > > 2. Full and module build graph: seems it is the one you target, ie
> bypass
> > > modules without change. Note that it only works if upstream graph is
> > > taken
> > > into account.
> > > 3. Full build: each mojo has incremental support so the full build gets
> > > it.
> > > Issue is that it requires each mojo to know if it needs to be executed
> or
> > > give enough info to the mojo executor to do so (gradle requires all
> > > inputs/outputs to assume this state - which is still just an heuristic
> > > and
> > > not 100% reliable).
> > >
> > > In current state, 2. sounds like a good option since 3 can require  a
> > > loot
> > > of work for external plugins (today's builds have a lot more of not
> maven
> > > provide plugins than core plugins).
> > > Now, we should be able to activate it or not so having a cacheLocation
> > > config in settings.xml can be good.
> > >
> > > Side notes:
> > >
> > > 1. having it on by default will break builds - reactor is deterministic
> > > and
> > > bypassing a module can break a build since it can init maven
> properties -
> > > for ex - for next modules
> > > 2. You cant find all in/out paths from the pom in general so your algo
> is
> > > not generic, a meta config can be needed in .mvn
> > > 3. We should let a mojo be able to disable that to replace default
> logic
> > > (surefire is a good example where it must be refined and it can save
> > > hours
> > > there ;))
> > > 4. Let's try to impl it as a mvn extension first then if it works well
> on
> > > multiple big project get it to core?
> >
> > Did anyone Google for "maven extension build cache"? There are already
> > commercial solutions for it.
> > Even though I would like to see improvements in this area, the old
> > architecture of Maven makes it quite hard to move to that situation.
> > First
> > of all it requires changes to the Plugin API (without breaking backwards
> > compatibility) to have support out of the box.
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > >
> > > Romain
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le ven. 13 sept. 2019 à 23:18, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > >> In theory, the incremental compiler would make it faster.
> > >> But this can be told only if you present a demo project with has
> trivial
> > >> tests taking much less time to complete than the compiler.
> > >>
> > >> In reality the tests in huge projects take significantly longer time
> > >> than
> > >> the compiler.
> > >> Some developers say "switch off all the tests" in the release phase
> but
> > >> that's wrong because then the quality goes down and methodologies are
> > >> broken.
> > >>
> > >> I can see a big problem that we do not have an interface between
> > >> Surefire
> > >> and Compiler plugin negotiating which tests have been modified
> including
> > >> modules and classes in the entire structure.
> > >>
> > >> Having incremental compiler is easy, just use compiler:3.8.1 or use
> the
> > >> Takari compiler.
> > >> But IMO the biggest benefit in performance would be after having the
> > >> truly
> > >> incremental test executor.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46 PM Maximilian Novikov <
> > >> [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi All,
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > *We want to create upstream change to Maven* to support true
> > >> incremental
> > >> > build for big-sized projects.
> > >> >
> > >> > To raise a pull request we have to pass long chain of Deutsche
> Bank’s
> > >> > internal procedures. So, *before starting the process we would like
> to
> > >> > get your feedback regarding this feature*.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > *Motivation:*
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Our project is hosted in mono-repo and contains ~600 modules. All
> > >> modules
> > >> > has the same SNAPSHOT version.
> > >> >
> > >> > There are lot of test automation around this, everything is tested
> > >> before
> > >> > merge into release branch.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Current setup helps us to simplify build/release/dependency
> management
> > >> for
> > >> > 10+ teams those contribute into codebase. We can release everything
> in
> > >> > 1-click.
> > >> >
> > >> > The major drawback of such approach is build time: *full local build
> > >> took
> > >> > 45-60 min (*-T8)*, CI build ~25min(*-T16*)*.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > To speed-up our build we needed 2 features: incremental build and
> > >> shared
> > >> > cache.
> > >> >
> > >> > Initially we started to think about migration to Gradle or Bazel. As
> > >> > migration costs for the mentioned tools were too high, we decided to
> > >> add
> > >> > similar functionality into Maven.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Current results we get: *1-2 mins for local build(*-T8*)* if build
> was
> > >> > cached by CI*, CI build ~5 mins (*-T16*).*
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > *Feature description:*
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > The idea is to calculate checksum for inputs and save outputs in
> > >> cache.
> > >> >
> > >> > [image: image2019-8-27_20-0-14.png]
> > >> >
> > >> > Each node checksum calculated with:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ·         Effective POM hash
> > >> >
> > >> > ·         Sources hash
> > >> >
> > >> > ·         Dependencies hash (dependencies within multi-module
> project)
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Project sources inputs are searched inside project + all paths from
> > >> > plugins configuration:
> > >> >
> > >> > [image: image2019-8-30_10-28-56.png]
> > >> >
> > >> > How does it work in practice:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > 1.       CI: runs builds and stores outputs in shared cache
> > >> >
> > >> > 2.       CI: reuse outputs for same inputs, so time is decreasing
> > >> >
> > >> > 3.       Locally: when I checkout branch and run ‘install’ for whole
> > >> > project, I get all actual snapshots from remote cache for this
> branch
> > >> >
> > >> > 4.       Locally: if I change multiple modules in tree, only changed
> > >> > subtree is rebuilt
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Impact on current Maven codebase is very localized (MojoExecutor,
> > >> where
> > >> we
> > >> > injected cache controller).
> > >> >
> > >> > Caching can be activated/deactivated by property, so current maven
> > >> flow
> > >> > will work as is.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > And the big plus is that you don’t need to re-work your current
> > >> project.
> > >> > Caching should work out of box, just need to add config in .mvn
> > >> folder.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Please let us know what do you think. We are ready to invest in this
> > >> > feature and address any further feedback.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Kind regards,
> > >> >
> > >> > Max
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ---
> > >> > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If
> > >> you
> > >> > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in
> error)
> > >> > please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any
> > >> > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in
> > >> this
> > >> > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
> > >> >
> > >> > Please refer to https://www.db.com/disclosures for additional EU
> > >> > corporate and regulatory disclosures and to
> > >> > http://www.db.com/unitedkingdom/content/privacy.htm for information
> > >> about
> > >> > privacy.
> > >> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

rfscholte
In reply to this post by Tamás Cservenák
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MPLUGIN-350 is the issue to start  
with.

Please read all the comments, because my original thought won't work.

thanks,
Robert

On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 17:10:13 +0200, Alexander Ashitkin  
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> We checked and price of 550$ per user makes us think twice of what's the  
> best way to proceed here :-)
> Regarding plugin api - yes, changes are desirable to make maven model  
> cache-friendly. Both in plugin invocation model and Mojo#execute  
> input/output apis. But it is possible to work with current model with  
> declarative approach.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> On 2019/09/14 10:45:24, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> But I do not understand why the Maven should be responsible for the  
>> project
>> cahe control/management of "/target" directories.
>> It is a responsibility of the build manager which is the Jenkins.
>> The Jenkins has the ability to archive files and such property already
>> exists in the Jenkins.
>>
>> So the Jenkins has a full knowledge about:
>>
>> 1. how long the workspace content retains intact
>> 2. what commit hash is for the last build/job/branch
>> 3. and what commit was successful
>>
>> If the target directories retain intact (or renewed from archive) in the
>> workspace for very long time and the workspace was reused by the next  
>> build
>> then I would say that the improvement should work as it is on CI level.
>>
>> Maybe what is necessary is only that improvement in Maven where we would
>> obtain the list of modules or directories of changes in the current  
>> commit.
>> Then the Maven can highly optimize its own build steps and build only  
>> those
>> modules which have been changed and their dependent modules.
>> So the interface between CI and Maven is needed in a kind of extension  
>> or
>> the class MavenCli can be extended with some new entrypoint.
>>
>> But I do not hink that Maven has to take care of responsibilities of CI
>> (project cache mgmt), that's not our task I would say and we as Maven  
>> would
>> never know all about the miscellaneous CI specifics and therefore we  
>> would
>> not cope with CI related troubles.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Tibor17
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 11:08 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 23:37:15 +0200, Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > There are multiple possible incremental support:
>> > >
>> > > 1. Scm related: do a status and rebuild downstream reactor
>> > > 2. Full and module build graph: seems it is the one you target, ie  
>> bypass
>> > > modules without change. Note that it only works if upstream graph is
>> > > taken
>> > > into account.
>> > > 3. Full build: each mojo has incremental support so the full build  
>> gets
>> > > it.
>> > > Issue is that it requires each mojo to know if it needs to be  
>> executed or
>> > > give enough info to the mojo executor to do so (gradle requires all
>> > > inputs/outputs to assume this state - which is still just an  
>> heuristic
>> > > and
>> > > not 100% reliable).
>> > >
>> > > In current state, 2. sounds like a good option since 3 can require  
>> a
>> > > loot
>> > > of work for external plugins (today's builds have a lot more of not  
>> maven
>> > > provide plugins than core plugins).
>> > > Now, we should be able to activate it or not so having a  
>> cacheLocation
>> > > config in settings.xml can be good.
>> > >
>> > > Side notes:
>> > >
>> > > 1. having it on by default will break builds - reactor is  
>> deterministic
>> > > and
>> > > bypassing a module can break a build since it can init maven  
>> properties -
>> > > for ex - for next modules
>> > > 2. You cant find all in/out paths from the pom in general so your  
>> algo is
>> > > not generic, a meta config can be needed in .mvn
>> > > 3. We should let a mojo be able to disable that to replace default  
>> logic
>> > > (surefire is a good example where it must be refined and it can save
>> > > hours
>> > > there ;))
>> > > 4. Let's try to impl it as a mvn extension first then if it works  
>> well on
>> > > multiple big project get it to core?
>> >
>> > Did anyone Google for "maven extension build cache"? There are already
>> > commercial solutions for it.
>> > Even though I would like to see improvements in this area, the old
>> > architecture of Maven makes it quite hard to move to that situation.
>> > First
>> > of all it requires changes to the Plugin API (without breaking  
>> backwards
>> > compatibility) to have support out of the box.
>> >
>> > Robert
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Romain
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Le ven. 13 sept. 2019 à 23:18, Tibor Digana  
>> <[hidden email]> a
>> > > écrit :
>> > >
>> > >> In theory, the incremental compiler would make it faster.
>> > >> But this can be told only if you present a demo project with has  
>> trivial
>> > >> tests taking much less time to complete than the compiler.
>> > >>
>> > >> In reality the tests in huge projects take significantly longer  
>> time
>> > >> than
>> > >> the compiler.
>> > >> Some developers say "switch off all the tests" in the release  
>> phase but
>> > >> that's wrong because then the quality goes down and methodologies  
>> are
>> > >> broken.
>> > >>
>> > >> I can see a big problem that we do not have an interface between
>> > >> Surefire
>> > >> and Compiler plugin negotiating which tests have been modified  
>> including
>> > >> modules and classes in the entire structure.
>> > >>
>> > >> Having incremental compiler is easy, just use compiler:3.8.1 or  
>> use the
>> > >> Takari compiler.
>> > >> But IMO the biggest benefit in performance would be after having  
>> the
>> > >> truly
>> > >> incremental test executor.
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46 PM Maximilian Novikov <
>> > >> [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Hi All,
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > *We want to create upstream change to Maven* to support true
>> > >> incremental
>> > >> > build for big-sized projects.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > To raise a pull request we have to pass long chain of Deutsche  
>> Bank’s
>> > >> > internal procedures. So, *before starting the process we would  
>> like to
>> > >> > get your feedback regarding this feature*.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > *Motivation:*
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Our project is hosted in mono-repo and contains ~600 modules. All
>> > >> modules
>> > >> > has the same SNAPSHOT version.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > There are lot of test automation around this, everything is  
>> tested
>> > >> before
>> > >> > merge into release branch.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Current setup helps us to simplify build/release/dependency  
>> management
>> > >> for
>> > >> > 10+ teams those contribute into codebase. We can release  
>> everything in
>> > >> > 1-click.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > The major drawback of such approach is build time: *full local  
>> build
>> > >> took
>> > >> > 45-60 min (*-T8)*, CI build ~25min(*-T16*)*.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > To speed-up our build we needed 2 features: incremental build and
>> > >> shared
>> > >> > cache.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Initially we started to think about migration to Gradle or  
>> Bazel. As
>> > >> > migration costs for the mentioned tools were too high, we  
>> decided to
>> > >> add
>> > >> > similar functionality into Maven.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Current results we get: *1-2 mins for local build(*-T8*)* if  
>> build was
>> > >> > cached by CI*, CI build ~5 mins (*-T16*).*
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > *Feature description:*
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > The idea is to calculate checksum for inputs and save outputs in
>> > >> cache.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > [image: image2019-8-27_20-0-14.png]
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Each node checksum calculated with:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > ·         Effective POM hash
>> > >> >
>> > >> > ·         Sources hash
>> > >> >
>> > >> > ·         Dependencies hash (dependencies within multi-module  
>> project)
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Project sources inputs are searched inside project + all paths  
>> from
>> > >> > plugins configuration:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > [image: image2019-8-30_10-28-56.png]
>> > >> >
>> > >> > How does it work in practice:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > 1.       CI: runs builds and stores outputs in shared cache
>> > >> >
>> > >> > 2.       CI: reuse outputs for same inputs, so time is decreasing
>> > >> >
>> > >> > 3.       Locally: when I checkout branch and run ‘install’ for  
>> whole
>> > >> > project, I get all actual snapshots from remote cache for this  
>> branch
>> > >> >
>> > >> > 4.       Locally: if I change multiple modules in tree, only  
>> changed
>> > >> > subtree is rebuilt
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Impact on current Maven codebase is very localized (MojoExecutor,
>> > >> where
>> > >> we
>> > >> > injected cache controller).
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Caching can be activated/deactivated by property, so current  
>> maven
>> > >> flow
>> > >> > will work as is.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > And the big plus is that you don’t need to re-work your current
>> > >> project.
>> > >> > Caching should work out of box, just need to add config in .mvn
>> > >> folder.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Please let us know what do you think. We are ready to invest in  
>> this
>> > >> > feature and address any further feedback.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Kind regards,
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Max
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > ---
>> > >> > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged  
>> information. If
>> > >> you
>> > >> > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in  
>> error)
>> > >> > please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any
>> > >> > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material  
>> in
>> > >> this
>> > >> > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Please refer to https://www.db.com/disclosures for additional EU
>> > >> > corporate and regulatory disclosures and to
>> > >> > http://www.db.com/unitedkingdom/content/privacy.htm for  
>> information
>> > >> about
>> > >> > privacy.
>> > >> >
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> >
>> >
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

Romain Manni-Bucau
In reply to this post by Tamás Cservenák
Le sam. 14 sept. 2019 à 22:17, Alexander Ashitkin <[hidden email]>
a écrit :

> Let us evaluate this approach. But if we go extension way, it will be not
> so big motivation to make it part of maven. and i'm not sure what are long
> term strategy for maven, but without incremental builld it becomes less and
> less attractive in our multi-branched world
>

Let see it this way: extension enables to test, enhance and validates the
approach.

Side note: for a medium size project like apache beam, migration from maven
to gradle saved 10mn on 1h20 of build and made the build not deterministic
anymore so even if Im the first motivated by incremental build, I am also
convinced your conclusion is mainly driven by disappointment to have steps
in the process and not a prediction ;).

Dont hesitate to ask help to write the extension though, happy to find some
time to enable you on that topic.



> Thank you
>
> On 2019/09/14 08:48:00, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Le sam. 14 sept. 2019 à 08:00, Alexander Ashitkin <
> [hidden email]>
> > a écrit :
> >
> > > Indeed we have a kind of the option 2 with variations. Current
> > > implementation is opt-in feature driven by configuration with some
> metadata
> > > of required cache behavior and hints.
> > >
> > > Maven extensions is the option, but we would love to have it in maven
> > > itself which is in interest of maven community i believe. Extension is
> a
> > > way we are trying to avoid and even not sure it could be implemented as
> > > extension as it requires changes in maven core.
> > >
> >
> > No real change required in maven core here since guice enables to
> override
> > any bean or even just to rewrite the pom to remove modules to just
> rebuild
> > the minimum set (keeping downstream project).
> >
> > The only challenge is an exhaustive test suite since your current impl
> can
> > easily fake a passing build (as gradle does today if you dont disable the
> > daemon and state cache on the CI).
> >
> > Side note: test relationship discovery is close to AOT in terms of impl
> and
> > very very slow so can be worse than doing the full suite in simple
> projects
> > and it still asks the IT question.
> >
> > So due to the numerous "?" of a core solution, extension is the way to
> go.
> > Now if a guice bean in core can help to write your extension, it can
> surely
> > be reviewed more easily IMHO.
> >
> > Hope it helps.
> >
> >
> > > Thanks in advance, Aleks
> > >
> > > On 2019/09/13 21:37:15, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > > There are multiple possible incremental support:
> > > >
> > > > 1. Scm related: do a status and rebuild downstream reactor
> > > > 2. Full and module build graph: seems it is the one you target, ie
> bypass
> > > > modules without change. Note that it only works if upstream graph is
> > > taken
> > > > into account.
> > > > 3. Full build: each mojo has incremental support so the full build
> gets
> > > it.
> > > > Issue is that it requires each mojo to know if it needs to be
> executed or
> > > > give enough info to the mojo executor to do so (gradle requires all
> > > > inputs/outputs to assume this state - which is still just an
> heuristic
> > > and
> > > > not 100% reliable).
> > > >
> > > > In current state, 2. sounds like a good option since 3 can require  a
> > > loot
> > > > of work for external plugins (today's builds have a lot more of not
> maven
> > > > provide plugins than core plugins).
> > > > Now, we should be able to activate it or not so having a
> cacheLocation
> > > > config in settings.xml can be good.
> > > >
> > > > Side notes:
> > > >
> > > > 1. having it on by default will break builds - reactor is
> deterministic
> > > and
> > > > bypassing a module can break a build since it can init maven
> properties -
> > > > for ex - for next modules
> > > > 2. You cant find all in/out paths from the pom in general so your
> algo is
> > > > not generic, a meta config can be needed in .mvn
> > > > 3. We should let a mojo be able to disable that to replace default
> logic
> > > > (surefire is a good example where it must be refined and it can save
> > > hours
> > > > there ;))
> > > > 4. Let's try to impl it as a mvn extension first then if it works
> well on
> > > > multiple big project get it to core?
> > > >
> > > > Romain
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le ven. 13 sept. 2019 à 23:18, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]>
> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > In theory, the incremental compiler would make it faster.
> > > > > But this can be told only if you present a demo project with has
> > > trivial
> > > > > tests taking much less time to complete than the compiler.
> > > > >
> > > > > In reality the tests in huge projects take significantly longer
> time
> > > than
> > > > > the compiler.
> > > > > Some developers say "switch off all the tests" in the release
> phase but
> > > > > that's wrong because then the quality goes down and methodologies
> are
> > > > > broken.
> > > > >
> > > > > I can see a big problem that we do not have an interface between
> > > Surefire
> > > > > and Compiler plugin negotiating which tests have been modified
> > > including
> > > > > modules and classes in the entire structure.
> > > > >
> > > > > Having incremental compiler is easy, just use compiler:3.8.1 or
> use the
> > > > > Takari compiler.
> > > > > But IMO the biggest benefit in performance would be after having
> the
> > > truly
> > > > > incremental test executor.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46 PM Maximilian Novikov <
> > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *We want to create upstream change to Maven* to support true
> > > incremental
> > > > > > build for big-sized projects.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To raise a pull request we have to pass long chain of Deutsche
> Bank’s
> > > > > > internal procedures. So, *before starting the process we would
> like
> > > to
> > > > > > get your feedback regarding this feature*.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Motivation:*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Our project is hosted in mono-repo and contains ~600 modules. All
> > > modules
> > > > > > has the same SNAPSHOT version.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are lot of test automation around this, everything is
> tested
> > > before
> > > > > > merge into release branch.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Current setup helps us to simplify build/release/dependency
> > > management
> > > > > for
> > > > > > 10+ teams those contribute into codebase. We can release
> everything
> > > in
> > > > > > 1-click.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The major drawback of such approach is build time: *full local
> build
> > > took
> > > > > > 45-60 min (*-T8)*, CI build ~25min(*-T16*)*.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To speed-up our build we needed 2 features: incremental build and
> > > shared
> > > > > > cache.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Initially we started to think about migration to Gradle or
> Bazel. As
> > > > > > migration costs for the mentioned tools were too high, we
> decided to
> > > add
> > > > > > similar functionality into Maven.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Current results we get: *1-2 mins for local build(*-T8*)* if
> build
> > > was
> > > > > > cached by CI*, CI build ~5 mins (*-T16*).*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Feature description:*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The idea is to calculate checksum for inputs and save outputs in
> > > cache.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [image: image2019-8-27_20-0-14.png]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Each node checksum calculated with:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ·         Effective POM hash
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ·         Sources hash
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ·         Dependencies hash (dependencies within multi-module
> > > project)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Project sources inputs are searched inside project + all paths
> from
> > > > > > plugins configuration:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [image: image2019-8-30_10-28-56.png]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How does it work in practice:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.       CI: runs builds and stores outputs in shared cache
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.       CI: reuse outputs for same inputs, so time is decreasing
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3.       Locally: when I checkout branch and run ‘install’ for
> whole
> > > > > > project, I get all actual snapshots from remote cache for this
> branch
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4.       Locally: if I change multiple modules in tree, only
> changed
> > > > > > subtree is rebuilt
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Impact on current Maven codebase is very localized (MojoExecutor,
> > > where
> > > > > we
> > > > > > injected cache controller).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Caching can be activated/deactivated by property, so current
> maven
> > > flow
> > > > > > will work as is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And the big plus is that you don’t need to re-work your current
> > > project.
> > > > > > Caching should work out of box, just need to add config in .mvn
> > > folder.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please let us know what do you think. We are ready to invest in
> this
> > > > > > feature and address any further feedback.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Max
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information.
> > > If
> > > > > you
> > > > > > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in
> > > error)
> > > > > > please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any
> > > > > > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material
> in
> > > this
> > > > > > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please refer to https://www.db.com/disclosures for additional EU
> > > > > > corporate and regulatory disclosures and to
> > > > > > http://www.db.com/unitedkingdom/content/privacy.htm for
> information
> > > > > about
> > > > > > privacy.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

Tibor Digana
In reply to this post by Enrico Olivelli
Alexander,

Nobody is a speaker for this community. I told you my experiences.
Caching the targets and repos is the old era of workarounds 10 years ago.
Any cache in Maven project is a pure workaround and not a systematic design.
You can reach the cache very easily if you do NOT delete the repo, see
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=maven-jenkins-lib.git;a=blob;f=vars/asfMavenTlpPlgnBuild.groovy;h=23269a36b02242216f8dce89dd541cef5229cc28;hb=HEAD#l225
Therefore I was saying that the USER has all capabilities in her/his hands
because it is all specific to her/his CI tool and CI solution. Of course
this kind of "cache" consumes some capacity on the disk as every other does
but HDD is much cheaper than RAM on the Cloud, no issue. It is easy and a
trivial solution with no work for us!

Systematic design leads to extensions which already exist on GitHub and
they are tracking SCM changes and they skip unmodified modules. This is
useful in huge tree of modules with long vertical depth. The extension msu
be very intelligent and it must understand the plugin configuration and
inheritance because that is a trigger of a module even if no change was
made in that module. So no guarantees anyway from our side, and the
responsibility for the reliable build must be on your side as a user.

A small multimodule project with depth 1 or 2 would need to use Eclipse
compiler. The first run will be slow of course. The reason to use
incremental compiler is fact that changes of the bottom of the module tree
trigger the top layer and all the project - no benefit without incremental
compiler. If the only root was changed then no need to build the bottom
because it was not changed! If the compiler is not reliable, it is not our
problem in Maven because it was users choice to use it, no guarantee!
The guarantee is to build the project from clean workspace.

Cheers
Tibor17





On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 2:27 PM Alexander Ashitkin <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Tibor
> Let me please share a personal opinion.
> To move this conversation forward, i would kindly ask to refrain from
> judgements and speculations about our project. Speaking on behalf of
> community is a certain responsibility after all. I guess your knowledge
> about our platform, it's architecture, cases, requirements, infrastructure
> is not so huge. In general judgements and speculation without basement is a
> very thin ice on which it is very easy to lose credibility. Thanks for
> sharing with us such an important concepts like microservices, nosql and
> all over important words. I believe that was done with good intentions, not
> with intention to insult.
>
> The second - as a Maven users, we came to community with (a) our case and
> b (proposal). Speaking to users that your case is wrong, irrelevant, etc is
> counterproductive as such. Framing all customers in your vision is a
> perfect way for product stagnation. Ignoring cases which customers bring to
> you is a way to miss opportunity for product growth.
>
> Productive would be to focus on our needs and how maven could address it.
> Another constructive input will be guidance on a proper feature
> implementation and next steps. Speculating about the project does not help
> at all and no the topic we are interested in.
>
> Thank you
> Aleks
>
> On 2019/09/14 20:37:03, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hello Maximilian,
> >
> > So now the next step is to break the traditional dependencies in Maven
> and
> > isolate the services via web-services, e.g. JAX-RS or JAX-WS and you
> would
> > not "touch" the POMs.
> > You need to use Logstash, Kibana, Elasticsearch, and Zipkin because the
> > logs won't be aggregated without these frameworks.
> > This would require you to spend some time and develop automatic
> deployment
> > and reliable CI.
> >
> > The monolith would become on infrastructure level but not on code level.
> > There you can write integration tests in every service. The input
> XML/Json
> > received from another service can be a mock and mock data. The service
> and
> > it's project as well as the tests still become isolated on project level.
> > The tests would become a documentation, and the data (XML/Json) would be
> a
> > specification for another team.
> > In this position a particular functionality would appear on the right
> > place. Shared data won't become a workaround anymore. Sharing something
> may
> > easily happen in the monolith project.
> >
> > The worst situation is if you share the database between the services
> > because there you really have to deploy many services.
> > One way is for instance an architecture where you have one NoSql database
> > for one webapp, and RDBMS as master data.
> > Each webapp has another NoSql database.
> > Then the services would read only from one NoSql and write to RDBMS
> master
> > data + JMS streaming the data back to NoSql databases via data/event bus.
> >
> > It is more about infrastructure and such isolation.
> > Since every app has isolated database, then not all services have to
> change
> > only because a new feature required database migration to new tables and
> > relations.
> > The probabily of a change in the service would be smaller.
> >
> > Then you have got DDD, CQRS but not the Event Sourcing - only partial.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tibor17
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 9:35 PM Maximilian Novikov <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Tibor,
> > >
> > > We understand your position.
> > >
> > > We moved from separated SCM to one SCM. We can move back, but we don't
> > > want this.
> > >
> > > In single SCM we like:
> > > 1. Atomic commits
> > > 2. Single point of responsibility.
> > > If someone makes incompatible change in shared library, he is
> responsible
> > > to update all usages. At first look It can be considered as slowness in
> > > development, but it helps us to avoid growing of technical debt. We
> never
> > > get in situation when projects A, B, C, D... depends on different
> version
> > > of shared library and we need to make major upgrade, it can block
> release
> > > of some apps and etc...
> > >
> > > Now we releasing 20+ clients apps and 50+ backend components every
> week or
> > > even often. With multiple SCM we will need to hire a team of release
> > > managers and build engineers to coordinate and support this.
> > >
> > > Again, we are don’t selling our approach. We implemented the missing
> for
> > > us feature.
> > >
> > > PS. Just thing why commercial products like Gradle Maven Extensions
> > > appeared.
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Tibor Digana <[hidden email]<mailto:
> [hidden email]>>
> > > Date: Saturday, 14 Sep 2019, 9:43 PM
> > > To: Maven Developers List <[hidden email]<mailto:
> > > [hidden email]>>
> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with
> > > local and remote caching
> > >
> > > Alexander,
> > > Enrico is really right. Today it is Microservices and there every
> > > microservice is in a separate SCM repo.
> > >
> > > It was just only an example with Microservices but in my experiences
> you
> > > can always find the lower bound modules in the hierary which do not
> change
> > > so much and segragate them in another SCM repos. Those should undergo
> the
> > > release process, share release versions and avoid sharing SNAPSHOT
> > > versions.
> > >
> > > You can find the top roots which are actually applications. If you
> have 10
> > > WAR files as a result of the build and all of them should be deployed,
> then
> > > there is a strong reason to separate them in separate SCM repos.
> > >
> > > Then this separation concept will guide you to isolate the middle
> layers
> > > into isolated services as JAR files. And then you endup with
> Microservices,
> > > SOA services and not JAR files or you will be much closer to them. the
> huge
> > > monolith project is gone.
> > >
> > > All the development process will be faster and more flexible than it
> was
> > > before. Just try!
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Tibor17
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 5:23 PM Alexander Ashitkin <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > HI Enrico
> > > > Thanks for feedback. that's a side discussion for best approach for
> > > > projects layouts. Monorepo has own own advocates and it is easy to
> find
> > > > posts describing why google, microsoft or facebook go monorepo.
> > > > Unlike of way of thought, we are ready to go globally in case of
> > > emergency
> > > > scenario. If say zero-day vulnerability is discovered in some of
> > > low-level
> > > > widely reused core libraries, we need just one click to
> build/test/deploy
> > > > and safely go live globally with whole estate updated on scale of
> > > thousands
> > > > of processes. And you know, there are people in the world who think
> that
> > > > scattered across small repos codebase is difficult to maintain and
> > > > snapshots are evil. It all depends.
> > > > Honestly, i think it will be it's a kind of reversed approach them
> you
> > > > build system defines how your software development processes work.
> Google
> > > > has own vision and just implemented Bazel and this is correct
> approach.
> > > Btw
> > > > Bazel is perfect for such scenario, but costly to migrate on for
> existing
> > > > project.
> > > >
> > > > So if you choose monorepo as we did it is normal to work just on a
> part
> > > of
> > > > project. You just need a way to deal with scalability challenges:
> > > > a) you hit hardware and infrastructure limitations and need to
> address
> > > > them in some way.
> > > > b) need to have incremental build so you can work on subpart of
> project
> > > > but contribute to shared codebase
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely yours, Aleks
> > > >
> > > > On 2019/09/14 08:41:37, Enrico Olivelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > I feel that in general having an huge monolithic project is kind
> of a
> > > > > project-smell.
> > > > > Btw I have some big project with 100+ modules so I can see your
> pain.
> > > > > In the daywork experience a single developer doesn't work on all
> of the
> > > > > modules but usually you touch 1-2 modules and maybe some
> > > > integration/system
> > > > > test.
> > > > > If you need to rebuild the full project for every change maybe
> there is
> > > > > something wrong with the overall design.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think you have you motivations for your layout, so let's talk
> about
> > > > your
> > > > > proposal.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you have a way to split your project in subsystems you can use
> some
> > > > > shared remote repository for deploying snapshots in order to share
> > > > > intermediate results with other developers
> > > > >
> > > > > If your goal is to be ready for releases I don't get your point.
> > > Usually
> > > > > you work with snapshots and for a release you have to rebuild one
> time
> > > > and
> > > > > only once the full codebase in order to ensure that you a
> consistent
> > > > build
> > > > > of the project.
> > > > > With all of this kind of temporary caches how do you ensure that
> the
> > > > final
> > > > > artifacts are the intended ones?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Beside note: this is not a real VOTE thread
> > > > >
> > > > > Just my 2 cents
> > > > >
> > > > > don't get me wrong, I admire your will to improve Maven ecosystem
> with
> > > > this
> > > > > cool feature! Thank you for contribution your work. We will try to
> get
> > > > the
> > > > > best
> > > > >
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > > Il sab 14 set 2019, 08:29 Laird Nelson <[hidden email]> ha
> > > scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:01 PM Alexander Ashitkin <
> > > > > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > This feature is true incremental build – you don’t build
> modules
> > > > which
> > > > > > > were not changed at all and build only modified/changed ones.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Suppose module B depends on module A and I change A.  Does B get
> > > > rebuilt in
> > > > > > your system?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Laird
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If
> you
> > > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
> > > please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any
> > > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in
> this
> > > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
> > >
> > > Please refer to https://www.db.com/disclosures for additional EU
> > > corporate and regulatory disclosures and to
> > > http://www.db.com/unitedkingdom/content/privacy.htm for information
> about
> > > privacy.
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] Maven incremental build for BIG-sized projects with local and remote caching

Alexander Ashitkin
In reply to this post by Tamás Cservenák
Sorry if duplicated, looks like my yesterday reply didn't come through.
Sharing results.

Configuration:
* verify -T4 -P default,all-shapshots-repos
* my project config (might be suboptimal for wicket)
* scala tests disabled in 2 modules (caused bytecode version conflict on my machine)

Results
Clean state (cache disabled):        15:58 min
Second run, target up to date (cache disabled):      10:20 min
Fully cached (no changes): 17.507 s
wicketstuff-jwicket-tooltip-wtooltips changed:          34.936 s
wicketstuff-rest-utils changed:   54.040 s


For wicketstuff-jwicket-tooltip-wtooltips i didnt check invalidated modules, for wicketstuff-rest-utils
 [wicketstuff-rest-lambda, wicketstuff-restannotations, wicketstuff-restannotations-json, wicketstuff-restannotations-examples] were invalidated and rebuilt

If you want to try other modules - please let me know.

regarding ide - it's a usual maven installation, so any ide with maven integration should benefit from cache them maven action invoked

Thank you
Aleks


On 2019/09/17 12:29:11, Martijn Dashorst <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This seems like it would benefit a lot of projects (at least it would ours).
>
> How would this work in coordination with IDE's? m2e has (afaict, but
> haven't looked closely) its own lifecycle management to bridge eclipse and
> maven. AFIAK only Netbeans uses maven directly?
>
> If you want to benchmark a public big repo, you can use Wicket Stuff Core (
> https://github.com/wicketstuff/core). It has 237 modules, and the build
> takes quite a while to compile and package. The project levels are not
> deep, but there's some nesting.
>
> Martijn
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 10:46 PM Maximilian Novikov <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> >
> >
> > *We want to create upstream change to Maven* to support true incremental
> > build for big-sized projects.
> >
> > To raise a pull request we have to pass long chain of Deutsche Bank’s
> > internal procedures. So, *before starting the process we would like to
> > get your feedback regarding this feature*.
> >
> >
> >
> > *Motivation:*
> >
> >
> >
> > Our project is hosted in mono-repo and contains ~600 modules. All modules
> > has the same SNAPSHOT version.
> >
> > There are lot of test automation around this, everything is tested before
> > merge into release branch.
> >
> >
> >
> > Current setup helps us to simplify build/release/dependency management for
> > 10+ teams those contribute into codebase. We can release everything in
> > 1-click.
> >
> > The major drawback of such approach is build time: *full local build took
> > 45-60 min (*-T8)*, CI build ~25min(*-T16*)*.
> >
> >
> >
> > To speed-up our build we needed 2 features: incremental build and shared
> > cache.
> >
> > Initially we started to think about migration to Gradle or Bazel. As
> > migration costs for the mentioned tools were too high, we decided to add
> > similar functionality into Maven.
> >
> >
> >
> > Current results we get: *1-2 mins for local build(*-T8*)* if build was
> > cached by CI*, CI build ~5 mins (*-T16*).*
> >
> >
> >
> > *Feature description:*
> >
> >
> >
> > The idea is to calculate checksum for inputs and save outputs in cache.
> >
> > [image: image2019-8-27_20-0-14.png]
> >
> > Each node checksum calculated with:
> >
> >
> >
> > ·         Effective POM hash
> >
> > ·         Sources hash
> >
> > ·         Dependencies hash (dependencies within multi-module project)
> >
> >
> >
> > Project sources inputs are searched inside project + all paths from
> > plugins configuration:
> >
> > [image: image2019-8-30_10-28-56.png]
> >
> > How does it work in practice:
> >
> >
> >
> > 1.       CI: runs builds and stores outputs in shared cache
> >
> > 2.       CI: reuse outputs for same inputs, so time is decreasing
> >
> > 3.       Locally: when I checkout branch and run ‘install’ for whole
> > project, I get all actual snapshots from remote cache for this branch
> >
> > 4.       Locally: if I change multiple modules in tree, only changed
> > subtree is rebuilt
> >
> >
> >
> > Impact on current Maven codebase is very localized (MojoExecutor, where we
> > injected cache controller).
> >
> > Caching can be activated/deactivated by property, so current maven flow
> > will work as is.
> >
> >
> >
> > And the big plus is that you don’t need to re-work your current project.
> > Caching should work out of box, just need to add config in .mvn folder.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please let us know what do you think. We are ready to invest in this
> > feature and address any further feedback.
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Max
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you
> > are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error)
> > please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any
> > unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this
> > e-mail is strictly forbidden.
> >
> > Please refer to https://www.db.com/disclosures for additional EU
> > corporate and regulatory disclosures and to
> > http://www.db.com/unitedkingdom/content/privacy.htm for information about
> > privacy.
> >
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]