Example of supporting multiple remote_instance_names?

[SinOverCos]

I'd like to have different logical remote execution services, to separate local vs. CI.

It seems like this should be achievable through --remote_instance_name=local and --remote_instance_name=ci

However, if I do:

• bazel build --remote_instance_name=local //...
• and then do bazel build --remote_instance_name=ci //...

The second build (with --remote_instance_name=ci) shows all remote cache hits, which suggests that the remote instances aren't actually separated?

There's this issue talking about something similar from 6 years ago, but I don't see where in the buildfarm docs instance_name is configurable anymore.

[werkt]

This has been silently pared down to ineffectiveness, and being considered for revival.

What behavior do you want for different instances? Complete isolation? Segmented storage? execution? caching? hierarchy?

Some expectation for a use case here might make this clearer.

[SinOverCos]

Hey @werkt! Thanks for taking a look.

I'm looking for complete isolation to comply with some security requirements. I've been doing this by provisioning two separate clusters separately from each other, one for local and one for CI, but it's been kind of unwieldy.

[goldencz]

@werkt in my case, I have two clusters, one is for development and another is for production. The difference is that production cluster needs to be very stable and powerful thus I will allocate more resource for it.
How is this case satisfied if instance_name isn't valid anymore?