Hi RocksDB maintainers,
I’m working on a small GitHub Actions CI acceleration experiment and wanted to ask whether this would be useful for RocksDB.
We tested facebook/rocksdb externally on an Incredibuild-enabled GitHub Actions runner for a CMake/static-library build and saw a strong signal:
- Baseline build: ~263s
- Incredibuild restored-cache build: ~14s
- Approx speedup: ~18.8x
The idea is to restore compiler artifacts across fresh GitHub Actions runners so compiler-heavy C/C++ projects do not rebuild the same graph from scratch every run.
If useful, I’d be happy to:
- Share the benchmark details and workflow configuration.
- Provide access to an Incredibuild-enabled runner for maintainers to test.
- Open a draft PR with an optional/experimental workflow.
- Compare against any native/cache setup you already prefer.
This would be fully opt-in and non-disruptive.
Contact: yossi.eliaz@incredibuild.com
GitHub: @zozo123
Thanks, and happy to adapt this to whatever would be most useful for the project.
Hi RocksDB maintainers,
I’m working on a small GitHub Actions CI acceleration experiment and wanted to ask whether this would be useful for RocksDB.
We tested
facebook/rocksdbexternally on an Incredibuild-enabled GitHub Actions runner for a CMake/static-library build and saw a strong signal:The idea is to restore compiler artifacts across fresh GitHub Actions runners so compiler-heavy C/C++ projects do not rebuild the same graph from scratch every run.
If useful, I’d be happy to:
This would be fully opt-in and non-disruptive.
Contact: yossi.eliaz@incredibuild.com
GitHub: @zozo123
Thanks, and happy to adapt this to whatever would be most useful for the project.