accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Time for a 1.8.0 release?
Date Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:50:16 GMT
So close to full passing in 1.8. It seems there's still a straggler with
time-sensitivity issues (I hope that's all it is, anyway). I'm not actually
sure why Jenkins reports the single test failure as two, though:
https://jenkins.revelc.net/job/Accumulo-1.8-ITs/36/


On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:51 PM Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have been able to get every IT to pass at least once except the following
>
> ACCUMULO-4362 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4362>
> ACCUMULO-4397 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4397>
>
> These are moved back to release 1.8.0 and are blockers.
>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sean Busbey wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Christopher<ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:47 PM Sean Busbey<busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> My understanding was that maintenance releases (aka double dot, e.g.
> >>>> 1.7.2) had relaxed criteria because we expected the scope of changes
> >>>> in them to be more limited. Even so, the release notes for 1.7.2,
> >>>> 1.7.1, and 1.7.0 all claim the ITs passed.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Even those releases have periodic IT failure.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Is there a reason we can't parallelize the ITs?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> We can. Eric's mrit effort was all intended towards that. But, that's
> not
> >>> the same as CI passing. I don't know what it would take to parallelize
> >>> them
> >>> in a CI server.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What's stopping
> >>>> builds.a.o from running them? Specific requests from projects to asf
> >>>> infra can get us resources if that's the problem.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I spoke to infra in HipChat about this a a few weeks ago, and
> mentioned
> >>> a
> >>> few things which impact builds on ASF jenkins (builds.apache.org):
> >>>
> >>> 1. Accumulo has an excessive number of tests to run.
> >>> 2. Build timeouts with Jenkins can abort builds.
> >>> 3. Tests are timing sensitive, and are affected by VM/host
> configuration
> >>> and contention with other concurrent builds from other projects.
> >>> 4. Tests need lots of RAM and storage (at least 4GB RAM, but ideally no
> >>> less than 16GB, and at least 6 GB for a workspace)
> >>> 5. Tests need specialized system configuration, (increasing ulimits,
> >>> optimizing kernel settings for swappiness, etc.)
> >>>
> >>> What we really need for reliable IT passing in CI, is exclusive use of
> >>> dedicated, bare-metal beefy build machines, for 6+ hours per build x 4
> >>> branches minimum, plus another 6+ hours for each pull request and other
> >>> builds which skipITs, so we can get immediate feedback on unit tests
> and
> >>> compilation errors.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> I took a first pass at a nightly (~once per 12 hours) job on asf build
> for
> >> master and it did okay, considering that I haven't spent any time trying
> >> to
> >> tune anything:
> >>
> >> https://builds.apache.org/job/Accumulo-master-IT/1/
> >>
> >> 2 hr 9 min, 7 failures out of 202 tests.
> >>
> >> I think we can do this; if anyone else is interested I'll start a new
> >> thread
> >> where we can discuss.
> >>
> >
> > +1 it would be great to do this on ASF infra.
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message