-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
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
Docker container for Eco-CI #70
Comments
Hi Arne,
|
Another problem we faced: On our "playground" Gitlab the CPU is not clearly specified, see output below:
Compare output on another machine:
We think this might be a problem for model accuracy. Will knowing the TDP help that, or is it a general problem? Do you have experience with this problem? |
This looks like an Intel Core i7-5650U from the specs. However, since you are operating within a virtualized environment, the exact physical CPU could be different and the hypervisor is abstracting and presenting it as a Broadwell processor. But I would assume it is fair to take the i7 as a reference for the energy usage. This is a fundamental problem with virtualises environments that you never really know what is underneath to hood and can't really be solved IMHO. |
So how do we overrule the hyporvisor and present Intel Core i7-5650U to Eco-CI? |
This is an example of the variables you need to determine for your box, if the specs are different to the know shared Gitlab / Github default runners: https://github.com/green-coding-solutions/eco-ci-energy-estimation/blob/7333e9a8e8036e5bf69d59dc8bb63d984b0f55c8/scripts/vars.sh#L150C1-L162C54 If you just post the variables here in the chat I will make a demo integration ready how this would be supplied. Since you are going for a full custom system with also a masked hypervisor CPUID we would add a functionality that you can specify all of these variables in the ci workflow file directly as variables. For these custom cases this is more suitable I think |
Hey @jochen-schuettler , we have a new variant #76 which removes all of the dependencies, needs no docker at all and just uses basic linux commandline tools. Happy for your feedback / opinion |
Hi, |
We know now that it is a XEON E5-2620 v4. Generating the power data file and using it by replacing the default.sh for quick testing worked so far. |
I agree. The idea is to have all default machines from GitHub and GitLab shipped in repository, which should equate to around 10 files. Everything else would then go through a custom route.
|
In different discussions off-Github and on-Github a problem with Eco-CI came to light:
github.com/cache
action can be used. On Gitlab it does not work atm. See issueWhat comes to mind is packaging Eco-CI in a docker image and running it from there.
Looping in @anitaschuettler and @jochen-schuettler and @ribalba
Some potential issues need to be discussed before integration:
docker
CLI available on Github? To my knowlege the docker-in-docker that is needed for Gitlab is not the default?/proc/stat
readable? Especially when using a different container runtime this directory might not be readable or it might not contain all CPUs of the system as it might be hidden ... [Example Nestybox which is typically used for stronger isolation]The docker container might solve many issues like the current cost of installation, non-root capabilities but also be more versatile.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: