[v1.7] Cherry pick Increase staggered build timeout (#18568)

[josephevans]

• Increase staggered build timeout to 180 min, since sanity build has 180 min timeout.

• Decrease timeout so everyone is happy.

Co-authored-by: Joe Evans [email protected]

[mxnet-bot]

Hey @josephevans , Thanks for submitting the PR
All tests are already queued to run once. If tests fail, you can trigger one or more tests again with the following commands:

• To trigger all jobs: @mxnet-bot run ci [all]
• To trigger specific jobs: @mxnet-bot run ci [job1, job2]

---

CI supported jobs: [windows-gpu, miscellaneous, centos-cpu, clang, edge, centos-gpu, unix-cpu, windows-cpu, unix-gpu, website, sanity]

---

Note:
Only following 3 categories can trigger CI :PR Author, MXNet Committer, Jenkins Admin.
All CI tests must pass before the PR can be merged.

[josephevans]

@mxnet-bot run ci [unix-gpu]

[mxnet-bot]

Jenkins CI successfully triggered : [unix-gpu]

[ciyongch]

Hi @josephevans , please help to re-trigger the unix-gpu job as it's stuck.
The modification increases the full time from 30min to 60 min, while decrease the sanity time from 180min to 60min, seems not align to the description?

[josephevans]

@mxnet-bot run ci [unix-gpu]

[mxnet-bot]

Jenkins CI successfully triggered : [unix-gpu]

[josephevans]

Hi @josephevans , please help to re-trigger the unix-gpu job as it's stuck.
The modification increases the full time from 30min to 60 min, while decrease the sanity time from 180min to 60min, seems not align to the description?

Hi @ciyongch, we actually increased the overall "full" job which first triggers sanity build, then if it passes we run the rest of the jobs. But since it doesn't make sense to have a longer timeout for sanity build than the "full" build, we made them the same. If the sanity build timed out, the full build would have already timed out of the timeout is longer.

[ciyongch]

Thanks for the update @josephevans . Ping @leezu @marcoabreu @aaronmarkham to have a review and help merge. Thanks!

[ciyongch]

Hi @leeze @ChaiBapchya @marcoabreu @aaronmarkham , can you help to take a review and merged. The corresponding one #18568 to v1.x branch is already merged.

[ciyongch]

LGTM.
@TaoLv @pengzhao-intel please help to merge.