Thread

Re: Heads Up: cirrus-ci is shutting down June 1st

Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com> — 2026-05-29T11:38:17Z

On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 11:51 AM Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com> wrote:
[..]
Hi, thanks to everybody for working on this.

> https://github.com/nbyavuz/postgres/actions/runs/26628396798

Windows (runs-on: windows-2022) seems kind of slow isn't it ?

Maybe that's not related to the patch itself, but any idea why the windows
tests are so slow? Or will we able to somehow accelerate those?

Windows - VS - Meson & ninja / succeeded [..] minutes ago in 31m 28s

Processor(s):              1 Processor(s) Installed.
[..]
Total Physical Memory:     16,379 MB
[..]

but:
NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS=4
[..]
+      TEST_JOBS: 8

vs

392/396 test_json_parser - postgresql:test_json_parser/002_inline
                 OK              152.56s   3712 subtests passed
393/396 pgbench - postgresql:pgbench/001_pgbench_with_server
                 OK              574.61s   474 subtests passed
394/396 pg_rewind - postgresql:pg_rewind/002_databases
                 OK              772.86s   10 subtests passed
395/396 pg_waldump - postgresql:pg_waldump/001_basic
                 OK              771.19s   156 subtests passed
396/396 libpq_pipeline - postgresql:libpq_pipeline/001_libpq_pipeline
                 OK              395.76s   23 subtests passed

while last CirrusCI run for me for Windows took 19min 21s (4 CPUs / 4 GBs,
but sysinfo reported there "Total Physical Memory: 16,380 MB").

If that's IO traffic as Andres described, maybe we could enable feature
called "Turn off Windows write-cache buffer flushing on the device"
in device manager -> disk -> policies, but dunno how much that would
help really as we seem to be already using fsync=off, maybe it helps
when saving other files too (???)

-J.