commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [pool] 1.5-RC2 available for review
Date Sun, 31 May 2009 14:20:21 GMT
On 31/05/2009, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com> wrote:
> sebb wrote:
>
> > On 31/05/2009, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On 31/05/2009, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  > On 31/05/2009, Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  >  > Thanks to all who provided feedback on RC1.
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >  Changes in RC2
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >  * Fixed copyright date in NOTICE.txt
> > >  >  >  * Restored development reports
> > >  >  >  * Improved thread-safety and timing/reliability in GOP,  GKOP
> tests -
> > >  >  > thanks, sebb!
> > >  >
> > >  >
> > >  > Unfortunately not enough, see below...
> > >  >
> > >  >
> > >  >  >  * Added link to release javadoc in site.xml
> > >  >  >  * Fixed xml errors in changes.xml
> > >  >  >  * Added test for ErodingPerKeyKeyedObjectPool
> > >  >  >  * Changed clirr comparison version from 1.3 to 1.4
> > >  >  >  * Added missing attributes to sources jar manifest
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >  The files are here:
> > >  >  >
> http://people.apache.org/~psteitz/commons-pool-1.5-RC2/
> > >  >
> > >  >
> > >  > Source and binary archives agree with each other; hashes and sigs OK.
> > >  >
> > >  >  Unfortunately, I got a new test failure with Java 1.4.2 and Maven:
> > >  >
> > >  >
> testEvictorVisiting(org.apache.commons.pool.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool)
> > >  >   Time elapsed: 0.063 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> > >  >  junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
> > >  >         at
> junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47)
> > >  >         at
> junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:20)
> > >  >         at
> junit.framework.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:27)
> > >  >         at
> org.apache.commons.pool.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.checkEvictorVisiting(TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.java:947)
> > >  >         at
> org.apache.commons.pool.impl.TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.testEvictorVisiting(TestGenericKeyedObjectPool.java:810)
> > >  >
> > >  >  I tried re-running the test, and it was OK. Tried rebuild and retest
> - OK.
> > >  >
> > >  >  As far as I can tell, that particular test does not use threads or
> > >  >  timers as part of the test case, so that suggests that there might
> be
> > >  >  a timing/threading issue in the main pool code.
> > >  >
> > >  >  I'll try re-running the test case a few more times to see if I can
> get
> > >  >  it to go wrong again.
> > >
> > >
> > > It failed again after a further 70 or so runs, so if it is a timing
> > >  issue, the window must be very small.
> > >
> > >
> > >  >  Also, clearly the failure message needs to be enhanced to show which
> > >  >  of the following checks failed:
> > >  >
> > >  >  assertTrue(visitCount >= cycleCount &&
> > >  >                             visitCount <= cycleCount + 1);
> > >  >
> > >  >  Unfortunately a lot of the assertions fail to provide any details of
> > >  >  what has gone wrong, which make debugging a lot harder.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm just working through the Test class now, adding messages where the
> > >  values are not obvious from the context.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > The test failed again (after about 80 retries), and the visitCount for
> > the "two" object was 1, whereas the expected value is 2 or 3.
> >
> >
>  Is the failure always on the same line of testEvictorVisiting?
>

So far, yes, it is always line 947

> >
> >
> > >  >  ==
> > >  >
> > >  >  Not sure if this is a problem, but the RELEASE-NOTES etc refer to
> 1.5-RC2.
> > >  >
> > >  >  The OSGI versions likewise include the RC2.
> > >  >
> > >  >  Does that mean there will need to be another build and vote before
> release?
> > >  >
> > >  >
> > >  >  >  The tag is here:
> > >  >  >
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/pool/tags/POOL_1_5_RC2/
> > >  >
> > >  >
> > >  > I used "Last Changed Rev: 780316"
> > >  >
> > >  >  The differences between the xml files have now disappeared; not sure
> > >  >  what went wrong before.
> > >  >
> > >  >  Also the only difference between the tag and the source archives are
> > >  >  doap and release notes, as expected.
> > >  >
> > >  >
> > >  >  >  Thanks!
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >  Phil
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >  >  >  To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > >  >  >  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> > >  >  >
> > >  >  >
> > >  >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message