Upgrade the docker version to 23.0.6 #5436
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5436 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 58.52% 76.73% +18.21%
===========================================
Files 241 241
Lines 14632 14632
Branches 616 616
===========================================
+ Hits 8563 11228 +2665
+ Misses 6069 3404 -2665
... and 134 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
| @@ -58,6 +58,13 @@ jobs: | |||
| uses: actions/checkout@v3 | |||
| - name: "Setup" | |||
| run: ./tools/github/setup.sh | |||
| - name: Maximize free space | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Based on this workaround: actions/runner-images#2840 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since multi-runtime tests passed with this change, I applied this change to all workflows.
|
Since upgrading the docker version could impact many downstream, I think it would be better to separate the change to upgrade docker and the change to maximize the build space for multi-runtime tests. |
|
Once this PR is merged, I would rebase this PR. |
style95
force-pushed
the
upgrade-docker
branch
from
08ffecd
to
ec8e870
Compare
|
It turns out that this change is not directly related to the failure of multi-runtime tests. |
|
|
||
| Using docker-runc obtains significantly better performance, but requires that the version of docker-runc within the invoker container is an exact version match to the docker-runc of the host environment. Failure to get an exact version match will results in error messages like: | ||
| Using runc obtains significantly better performance, but requires that the version of runc within the invoker container is an exact version match to the runc of the host environment. Failure to get an exact version match will results in error messages like: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this still a requirement with runc that versions must be an exact match? Makes it very hard to use runc in serverless environment where you may control the invoker container but not the underlying server.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it should not be an exact match, but some versions have breaking changes.
For example, the command's name is changed from docker-runc to runc.
The root volume directory was also different in the previous version.
https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/pull/4430/files#diff-072209721097df0ae37ac99015b28844fec1f9b390314782671445b4f80af622R185
I assume if there is no such breaking change, runc would be compatible, but anyway, it would be better to use the same version if possible.
|
LGTM this is very long overdue, are there any blockers to merging this. I believe this should only affect docker client right anyways? |
|
I have been thinking of running a performance test with this version. |
|
This PR has opened for a while, I would merge this. |
Description
The docker version of the GitHub action runner is 23.0.6.
Instead of downgrading the engine version I want to give a shot to upgrade the client version.
Related issue and scope
My changes affect the following components
Types of changes
Checklist: