Download speed on self-hosted runners is significantly slower
See original GitHub issue👋🏼
We’ve started working with self-hosted runners, but noticed that the download speed when downloading the cache is significantly slower than on hosted runners. Here’s the breakdown of what is happening:
- Self-hosted runner version:
2.296.2
- Cache size:
~300MB
- Average download speed
- Hosted runners:
50 MBs/s
- Self-hosted runners:
3.5 MBs/s
- Hosted runners:
Hosted:
Self-hosted:
Workflow:
- name: Cache yarn dependencies
uses: actions/cache@v3
id: cache-dependencies
with:
path: node_modules
key: ${{ runner.os }}-yarn-${{ hashFiles('**/yarn.lock') }}
restore-keys: |
${{ runner.os }}-yarn-
- name: Install dependencies
if: steps.cache-dependencies.outputs.cache-hit != 'true'
run: |
yarn install --frozen-lockfile
I’m pretty confident there’s no limitation on our machine, and I’m not sure if this is a limitation on the runner itself, but at that speed installing dependencies takes practically the same time as pulling the cache.
Thanks in advance!
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created a year ago
- Reactions:1
- Comments:5 (1 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Add support for fast caching on github self-hosted runners ...
In the places we have adopted Wireit, it seems significantly faster to use GitHub Actions Caching than to run the build script itself....
Read more >Upload speed for self-hosted site isn't so fast - Reddit
When I download a file I am running over a tunnel (fast public IP box, not over CloudFlare), on a fast connected remote...
Read more >If your Self Hosted IR is running Slow what steps ... - YouTube
If your Self Hosted IR is running Slow what steps you will take in Azure Data Factory | ADF Interview Questions 2022, In...
Read more >Why GitHub Actions is so slow - BuildJet
In this breakdown we will take a close look at why GitHub Actions default runners are so slow. Firstly, we'll compare GitHub Actions...
Read more >Set up your own GitHub runner to increase build performance
Here you can create a self-hosted runner for your organization. ... Every build was ~50% slower than when running only one build.
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
I’m having the same issue (10 MB/s in self-hosted, 100 MB/s in GitHub hosted runners), and I’m wondering: why isn’t the cache hosted locally (in the runner) so there is no need for internet transfer? Where exactly is it hosted?
We moved to Self-Hosted Runners to reduce our build times with custom AMIs and bigger instances, but our efforts are being hindered by extremely slow cache download and post-job upload steps. What takes just 10-20 seconds on the GitHub hosted runner sometimes takes up to 15 minutes on our Self-Hosted runners.