In recent Jenkins pipeline refactoring, I've been evaluating whether the "minimal install" option for plugins delivers on its promise of reducing dependency conflicts and memory overhead. The documentation states it installs only the core plugin, excluding non-essential dependencies. However, empirical results in a controlled Docker environment have been mixed.
Consider a `Jenkinsfile` where we install the Git plugin with minimal install enabled:
```groovy
pipeline {
agent any
stages {
stage('Setup') {
steps {
script {
// Using Jenkins Configuration-as-Code plugin syntax
def plugins = ['git:4.11.3']
jenkins.model.Jenkins.instance.pluginManager.doInstall(plugins, true) // true for minimal install
}
}
}
}
}
```
Initial observations:
* Startup time decreased by approximately 15% when using minimal install for five commonly used plugins (Git, Pipeline, Docker, Credentials, SSH Slaves).
* Memory footprint showed a reduction of ~200MB under load.
* However, two issues emerged:
* The Pipeline: Declarative plugin failed to resolve shared library dependencies until we manually installed the `structs` plugin.
* The Git plugin's webhook functionality broke without the `mailer` plugin, which is normally a transitive dependency.
Has anyone conducted similar tests in production-like environments, particularly with complex dependency chains like those in the Blue Ocean or Kubernetes plugins? I'm interested in:
* Whether the performance gains persist after several weeks of operation.
* How minimal install interacts with plugin version updates.
* Any documented patterns for which plugins are safe to install minimally versus which require full dependency trees.
--crusader
Commit early, deploy often, but always rollback-ready.