There may be some implementations in common with https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-41334 ? As there needs to be a more variable way of structuring stages.

Hi guys, 

Is there any chance of this being implemented?

currently i have a pipeline where i create an apt repo on a linux agent, then pull from it on a different agent. I need those 2 stages to not be interrupted so ideally i would lock around both stages.

I'm not sure of a way to do this currently?

dan

for me actually an alternative would be to be able to run steps within a stage on different agents but i'm not sure that makes sense

danturn I didn't try it but if I remember correctly you can already run steps on different agents with something like this:

stage('My Stage') {
  steps {
    node('some label') {
      // run step 1
    }

    node('another label') {
      // run step 2
    }
  }
}

You probably have to use `agent none` for this to work properly.

ooh ok, that would solve my problem
 
i'll try it and update
 
thanks

that works, thank you very much Roch!!

Alternatively it would be great if we could do something like lock() somewhere and unlock() in another place in pipeline.

Example (similar to my own case):

[...]
def selectedNode = utils.selectAvailableResource()

pipeline {
  agent none
    stages {
      stage('Checkout code') {
        agent { label selectedNode }
        steps {
          lock('aResource')
        }
      }
      stage('Build') {
        agent { label selectedNode }
        steps {
          echo 'Still locked'
        }
      }
      stage('Integration tests') {
        agent { label selectedNode }
        steps {
          echo 'Still locked'
        }
      }
      stage('Cleanup') {
        agent { label selectedNode }
        steps {
          unlock('aResource')
          echo 'Finally unlocked'
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

What matt_was suggested would open up many exiting possibilities.

For example locking a resource prior to acquiring a node (best practice), but releasing it while retaining the build slot and workspace for further processing that does not need any locks.

// acquire some kind of test resources
def locks = lock(label: 'aResource', quantity: 1)
node {
    stage('build'){
       sh "mvn install -D${locks[0].name}"
       unlock(locks)
    }
    // continoue processing without having to leave the node
    stage('analysis'){
        sh "mvn sonar:sonar"
    }
}

having that return value would be awesome too (to ask for the name of a resource and possibly more properties), but this is discussed in other tickets.

This is the single issue that is preventing us from moving to declarative pipeline. We currently use scripted Jenkinsfiles for exactly this purpose: to be able to define multiple stages which can lock a resource atomically.

In our case, we perform embedded hardware testing which requires the use of hardware resources to run testing. Because there are several stages in our pipeline which interact with the hardware (resetting, provisioning, testing, etc), the ability to lock across multiple stages is a necessity.

I do like the concept of being able to control "lock" versus "unlock". I think that would solve the problem sufficiently for us, and open up new possibilities.