Uploaded image for project: 'Jenkins'
  1. Jenkins
  2. JENKINS-41781

Support multiple parallels within a stage in the Pipeline Visualization

    XMLWordPrintable

Details

    • Bug
    • Status: Closed (View Workflow)
    • Minor
    • Resolution: Duplicate
    • blueocean-plugin
    • None
    • Jenkins 2.32.2
    • iapetus

    Description

      Add support in the UI to handle multiple build in parallel.

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment -

            shahmishal This sounds like JENKINS-38442. Would you agree?

            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment - shahmishal This sounds like JENKINS-38442 . Would you agree?
            michaelneale Michael Neale added a comment -

            shahmishal jamesdumay

            I sketched what this may look like with matrix. I think what is really being looked for here is matrix support - but with some limited nested stages. Any time there is a bulk fan out, 90% of the time people want matrix. One plan is just to have proper matrix support for these cases.

            So this may look in pseudo pipeline, something like:

            parallel(
                 'release'  : {
                      stage('Build') {
                              ..
                      } 
                      stage('Test') {
                         matrix(...) {
                         }          
                      }
                 }, 
                 'debug' : {
                   stage('Build') {
                           ..
                   } 
                   stage('Test') {
                      matrix(...) {
                      }          
                   }
                 }
            )
            
            
            

            This would allow the differnet stages to run concurrently before joining up with subsequent stages...

            thoughts? closer?

            michaelneale Michael Neale added a comment - shahmishal jamesdumay I sketched what this may look like with matrix. I think what is really being looked for here is matrix support - but with some limited nested stages. Any time there is a bulk fan out, 90% of the time people want matrix. One plan is just to have proper matrix support for these cases. So this may look in pseudo pipeline, something like: parallel( 'release' : { stage( 'Build' ) { .. } stage( 'Test' ) { matrix(...) { } } }, 'debug' : { stage( 'Build' ) { .. } stage( 'Test' ) { matrix(...) { } } } ) This would allow the differnet stages to run concurrently before joining up with subsequent stages... thoughts? closer?
            shahmishal mishal shah added a comment -

            michaelneale Yes, this sounds closer to what I was looking for. https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-38442 is lot more complex but it would work too.

            shahmishal mishal shah added a comment - michaelneale Yes, this sounds closer to what I was looking for. https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-38442 is lot more complex but it would work too.
            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment -

            shahmishal this is good to know. I think the ultimate solution for JENKINS-38442, based on the use cases we are hearing more and more of, is that Pipeline needs better support for matrix style testing. Im going to close this against JENKINS-38442 and link it to our internal tracker for matrix.

            jamesdumay James Dumay added a comment - shahmishal this is good to know. I think the ultimate solution for JENKINS-38442 , based on the use cases we are hearing more and more of, is that Pipeline needs better support for matrix style testing. Im going to close this against JENKINS-38442 and link it to our internal tracker for matrix.

            People

              jamesdumay James Dumay
              shahmishal mishal shah
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: