couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@me.com>
Subject Re: Test suite errors
Date Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:48:10 GMT
I have absolutely no problem with the time taken for the tests.

My only issue is that they intermittently fail. Because of that, I am now suspicious of any
results I get.

Is it really an error, or is it a timing issue or a race condition?

Suspicious tests are next to useless.

On 19 Mar 2010, at 11:46, Robert Dionne wrote:

> I see similar issues, though never with 100-ref-counter.  It looks like a race condition
but should be checked because the place where it's used, couch_db:is_idle, depends on that
value being right.
> 
> make check is much faster that make cover	
> 
> I think it's ok for tests to take a long time to run and I suspect most users are used
to it. It's a measure of how solid the code is. Perhaps there could be two levels of testing,
one that's quick and superficial and sufficient to verify the build so you can run it repeatedly
in reasonable time, and the other for users at install time that includes long running performance
tests, test that run a server and so forth. At build time you'd only need to run this once
at the end.
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 19, 2010, at 7:13 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> 
>> Some of the test suites rely on timing delays, and these are unpredictable, resulting
in non-deterministic test failures. The full tag/build/test cycle is long enough as it is
- but having to start again from scratch when the last, and second, run of the test suite
fails adds a significant amount of friction for me. I would like to ask that this issue is
address as soon as possible. It is entirely my fault that this release has been delayed as
much as it has, but my job would be made significantly easier if the test suite behaved consistently.
>> 
>> I got the error included below this morning, and when I ran it again, there was no
error. I am going to ignore this for now, and just call a vote on the release. But doing so
is risky. I have no idea why this failed once, and as release manager, it is my duty to understand
the bugs we're shipping with. I don't like being in a position where I am ignoring them for
convenience. They exist as warning beacons, primarily for me, and when I start having to ignore
them, they have utterly failed to do their job properly.
>> 
>> Apologies if this email sounds frustrated. I am frustrated.
>> 
>> I'm not finger pointing, just trying to illustrate the reasons for my belief that
this problem should be addressed as soon as possible.
>> 
>> ./test/etap/run
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/001-load........................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/002-icu-driver..................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/010-file-basics.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/011-file-headers................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/020-btree-basics................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/021-btree-reductions............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/030-doc-from-json...............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/031-doc-to-json.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/040-util........................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/041-uuid-gen....................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/050-stream......................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/060-kt-merging..................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/061-kt-missing-leaves...........ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/062-kt-remove-leaves............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/063-kt-get-leaves...............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/064-kt-counting.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/065-kt-stemming.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/070-couch-db....................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/080-config-get-set..............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/081-config-override.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/082-config-register.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/083-config-no-files.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/090-task-status.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/100-ref-counter.................FAILED test 8  
>> 	Failed 1/8 tests, 87.50% okay
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/110-replication-httpc...........ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/111-replication-changes-feed....ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/112-replication-missing-revs....ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/120-stats-collect...............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/121-stats-aggregates............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/130-attachments-md5.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/140-attachment-comp.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/150-invalid-view-seq............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/160-vhosts......................ok             
>> Failed Test                               Stat Wstat Total Fail  List of Failed
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/100-ref-cou                8    1  8
>> Failed 1/33 test scripts. 1/456 subtests failed.
>> Files=33, Tests=456, 74 wallclock secs (44.01 cusr +  4.38 csys = 48.39 CPU)
>> Failed 1/33 test programs. 1/456 subtests failed.
>> make: *** [check] Error 255
>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message