Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Bumps Yarn to 1.15 #8095

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Mar 9, 2019
Merged

Bumps Yarn to 1.15 #8095

merged 3 commits into from
Mar 9, 2019

Conversation

arcanis
Copy link
Contributor

@arcanis arcanis commented Mar 9, 2019

Summary

This diff uses the yarn-path configuration settings to ensure that Jest always run with the specified Yarn release, regardless of the one used in the global environment.

I've also removed workspaces-experimental since it's not required anymore.

Test plan

Ran yarn -v in the repo, got 1.15. CI should print it as well.

@arcanis arcanis force-pushed the yarn-version branch 2 times, most recently from d3421eb to 4af97e0 Compare March 9, 2019 14:29
@arcanis
Copy link
Contributor Author

arcanis commented Mar 9, 2019

Node 6 seems to have failed due to an OOM - does that happen regularly?

@jeysal
Copy link
Contributor

jeysal commented Mar 9, 2019

Never seen it happen so far, although we do know that tsc -b is terribly slow for us. If it's flaky it must be super rare. No idea how to reproduce this though :/

@jeysal
Copy link
Contributor

jeysal commented Mar 9, 2019

Although the tsc process peaks at more than 1.5G RES for me when using Node 6, while it never even hits 500M on current. But I can't really imagine the Yarn version could be involved in this.

@arcanis
Copy link
Contributor Author

arcanis commented Mar 9, 2019

Wow that's a lot! Ok, good to merge then?

@jeysal
Copy link
Contributor

jeysal commented Mar 9, 2019

Should do a rerun to be safe. I don't have permission to trigger builds (maybe you do as an org member), otherwise git commit --amend --no-edit and force push :)

@jeysal
Copy link
Contributor

jeysal commented Mar 9, 2019

Failed again, this time due to timeout. This hasn't happened on any of the recent master builds. There's something fishy going on here that deteriorates the performance of postinstall yarn build.
Any ideas? Does Yarn mess with the spawned node process in any way since v14/15?

@arcanis
Copy link
Contributor Author

arcanis commented Mar 9, 2019

Nope 🤔 and I don't see memory differences when trying locally with time -v ...

@arcanis
Copy link
Contributor Author

arcanis commented Mar 9, 2019

I may have an idea - my theory is that TypeScript tries to somehow parse the Yarn release file. Since it's relatively large, it crashes on Node 6. I've tried adding those files to the exclude list, let's see what happens.

@jeysal
Copy link
Contributor

jeysal commented Mar 9, 2019

Thought about that as well, but allowJs is not enable 🤔

@arcanis
Copy link
Contributor Author

arcanis commented Mar 9, 2019

Seems to have worked! I'll remove the useless releases still checked-in, and if both run are green I'd be relatively confident the problem is fixed. Very interesting to know!

@SimenB
Copy link
Member

SimenB commented Mar 9, 2019

Oh, that's interesting! It makes sense to ignore it anyways, but it shouldn't die anyways...

Copy link
Contributor

@jeysal jeysal left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM if CI passes

@SimenB
Copy link
Member

SimenB commented Mar 9, 2019

The TS step went through, so looking good 🙂

@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 11, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants