commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <>
Subject Re: [JCS] Continuum test failures
Date Tue, 08 Apr 2014 21:58:41 GMT
On 8 April 2014 20:11, Thomas Vandahl <> wrote:
> On 07.04.14 21:38, sebb wrote:
>>> Indeed. It also has some peculiar behaviour in that it allows the
>>> storage directory to be changed after initialisation.
>>> Looks like the directory can be anywhere so it might use a directory
>>> with existing files in it that are not actually cache files.
>>> Seems rather dangerous to allow this.
> Well then, as there is no documentation either, I'd say: away it goes.

Maybe move it to the sandbox?
At some point probably worth moving the non-core stuff to a branch as well.
No point having it cluttering up trunk if it is not being used.

>>>> Well, based on the log output of Continuum it looks like the client
>>>> tries to connect to the server before the server is up. I see lots of
>>>> "connection refused" exceptions in the log.
>> Which log file is that?
>> I don't see these.
> I don't see them anymore in the latest tests.
>> Also, maybe we can add debug to the server startup to check that it is
>> able to start?
> There should be a log file under target/jcs.log.

Yes, I have seen that, but it did not have any errors in it on Continuum.

Looks like the file is being recreated for each test as it is very small.
Not sure why that should be different on Continuum - on Windows I see
output from all the tests.
Any ideas on this?

I have now tried running the failing test on its own, and it tries to
start the server on which is the Continuum external IP

Looks like there is an issue with the Continuum host database.

> Successful start is logged with level INFO.
>>> I thought it was going to be a lot easier than it has turned out to be.
>>> The code needs a lot of TLC to bring it up to date and make it thread-safe.
> I've been investing a lot already to get it to the level it is now. You
> may want to have a look at the 1.3 tag...

I'm not complaining about the work you have done so far.
I'm sure it's already a lot better than it was.

But I suspect there is a lot more needed in order to bring the
original design and implementation up to date.
Java has moved on a long way since JDK 1.3 when the previous version
was released.
There's a much better understanding of threading issues now, and with
faster multicore systems it's now necessary to be a lot more careful
about ensuring thread safety.

> Bye, Thomas.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message