XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    FYI - Applying 11/3/2022 and 11/4/2022 Commits in XO from Sources

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    22 Posts 9 Posters 4.7k Views 7 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • DanpD Offline
      Danp Pro Support Team @iLix
      last edited by

      @iLix I recall this being an issue in the past, but I've been building XO with 2GB for a while now.

      I gskgerG 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • I Away
        iLix @Danp
        last edited by

        @Danp OK, good to know. I just set it to 4GB and never looked backπŸ™‚

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • gskgerG Offline
          gskger Top contributor @Danp
          last edited by

          @Danp Same here. Have been running XO from script with 4GB since I ran into problems I think a year ago. No problems since than πŸ˜ƒ

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • DanpD Offline
            Danp Pro Support Team
            last edited by

            FWIW, today I'm having trouble building with 4GB --

            [08:34:41] Starting 'copyAssets'...
            transforming (10) ../../node_modules/@vue/runtime-dom/dist/runtime-dom.esm-bundler.jsKilled
            error Command failed with exit code 137.
            info Visit https://yarnpkg.com/en/docs/cli/run for documentation about this command.
            ERROR: "type-check" exited with 137.
            * @xen-orchestra/lite:build βˆ’ Error: 1
            <snip>
            [08:37:56] Finished 'copyAssets' after 3.23 min
            [08:39:37] Finished 'buildScripts' after 4.92 min
            [08:39:37] Finished 'build' after 4.92 min
            βœ– 1
            error Command failed with exit code 1.
            
            JamfoFLJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • JamfoFLJ Offline
              JamfoFL @Danp
              last edited by

              I kept my VM at 4 GB after making the report the other day and haven't had any issues since. I even updated again this morning (after I noticed the large number of commits from yesterday and this morning) and everything ran just fine. The only thing out of the ordinary I noticed was I am still getting the "chunk" error message during the process.

              (!) Some chunks are larger than 500 KiB after minification. Consider:
              - Using dynamic import() to code-split the application
              - Use build.rollupOptions.output.manualChunks to improve chunking: https://rollupjs.org/guide/en/#outputmanualchunks
              - Adjust chunk size limit for this warning via build.chunkSizeWarningLimit.
              

              That hasn't caused any issues, as far as I see. Everything appears to be working as it should!

              H 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • H Offline
                hoerup @JamfoFL
                last edited by

                When I (re)build on my 3 GB vm i use this before in order to keep nodejs at bay

                export NODE_OPTIONS='--max-old-space-size=3072'
                

                And then it runs smoothly

                DanpD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • DanpD Offline
                  Danp Pro Support Team @hoerup
                  last edited by

                  @hoerup Unfortunately, that doesn't help in my situation. I recently upgraded the VM to Ubuntu 22.10, so maybe that is contribution to the problem.

                  JamfoFLJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • JamfoFLJ Offline
                    JamfoFL @Danp
                    last edited by

                    @Danp I'm using Debian Bullseye... I am able to run the updates now, but still see that same "chunk size" error notice you initially reported. Still, it seems you have it even worse...

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • ronivayR Offline
                      ronivay Top contributor
                      last edited by ronivay

                      I'm running daily installation from sources on multiple different OS's. All have the same specs: 2vCPU/4GB RAM. This has worked flawlessly for a long time. Recently (starting from 4th/5th Nov) i've started to see OOM errors almost daily during yarn build which then cause it to fail with following error:

                      Using polyfills: No polyfills were added, since the `useBuiltIns` option was not set.
                      [01:23:25] Finished 'copyAssets' after 36 s
                      [01:24:33] Finished 'buildScripts' after 1.73 min
                      [01:24:33] Finished 'build' after 1.73 min
                      βœ– 1
                      error Command failed with exit code 1.
                      

                      It isn't consistent, sometimes it's debian that fails, sometimes ubuntu, sometimes centos/almalinux and so on. Something has definitely changed in the build procedure that eats more RAM than it used to.

                      I’m fine with increasing the RAM if needed. Just wanted to point this out if there’s something out of the ordinary with latest changes.

                      DanpD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • DanpD Offline
                        Danp Pro Support Team @ronivay
                        last edited by

                        @ronivay said in FYI - Applying 11/3/2022 and 11/4/2022 Commits in XO from Sources:

                        Something has definitely changed in the build procedure that eats more RAM than it used to.

                        Agreed. Maybe @julien-f can add some insight into what has changed and how to successfully build from sources.

                        julien-fJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • julien-fJ Offline
                          julien-f Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder XO Team @Danp
                          last edited by

                          I believe this was due to the inclusion of XO Lite on the master branch.

                          I've limited the number of packages built concurrently: https://github.com/vatesfr/xen-orchestra/commit/08298d3284119ad855552af36a810a3a9a006759

                          Tell me if that helps πŸ™‚

                          0 julien-f committed to vatesfr/xen-orchestra
                          feat: limit concurrency of root build script
                          
                          Should fixes https://xcp-ng.org/forum/post/54567
                          JamfoFLJ ronivayR 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 1
                          • JamfoFLJ Offline
                            JamfoFL @julien-f
                            last edited by

                            @julien-f I just ran a "yard build" this morning, and other than still seeing the chunk error message:

                            (!) Some chunks are larger than 500 KiB after minification. Consider:
                            - Using dynamic import() to code-split the application
                            - Use build.rollupOptions.output.manualChunks to improve chunking: https://rollupjs.org/guide/en/#outputmanualchunks
                            - Adjust chunk size limit for this warning via build.chunkSizeWarningLimit.
                            

                            Everything else ran fine... no errors or OOM issues.

                            julien-fJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                            • julien-fJ Offline
                              julien-f Vates πŸͺ Co-Founder XO Team @JamfoFL
                              last edited by

                              @JamfoFL Great!

                              Yes, the warning is unrelated (ping @pdonias).

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                              • ronivayR Offline
                                ronivay Top contributor @julien-f
                                last edited by

                                @julien-f haven't seen OOM's after this so looks good, thank you.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 3
                                • E Offline
                                  EliSmith
                                  last edited by

                                  Thanks for sharing πŸ™‚

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • First post
                                    Last post