hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Patch testing
Date Thu, 06 Jan 2011 00:33:25 GMT
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Nigel Daley <ndaley@mac.com> wrote:

> Todd, would love to get
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-2121 fixed first since
> this is failing every night on trunk.
>

What if we disable that test, move that issue to 0.22 blocker, and then
enable the test-patch? I'll also look into that one today, but if it's
something that will take a while to fix, I don't think we should hold off
the useful testing for all the other patches.

 -Todd

On Jan 5, 2011, at 2:45 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
>
> > Hi Nigel,
> >
> > MAPREDUCE-2172 has been fixed for a while. Are there any other particular
> > JIRAs you think need to be fixed before the MR test-patch queue gets
> > enabled? I have a lot of outstanding patches and doing all the test-patch
> > turnaround manually on 3 different boxes is a real headache.
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Todd
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Nigel Daley <ndaley@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Ok, HDFS is now enabled.  You'll see a stream of updates shortly on the
> ~30
> >> Patch Available HDFS issues.
> >>
> >> Nige
> >>
> >> On Dec 20, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Jakob Homan wrote:
> >>
> >>> I committed HDFS-1511 this morning.  We should be good to go.  I can
> >>> haz snooty robot butler?
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Thanks Jacob. I am wasted already but I can do it on Sun, I think,
> >>>> unless it is done earlier.
> >>>> --
> >>>>  Take care,
> >>>> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 19:41, Jakob Homan <jghoman@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>>> Ok.  I'll get a patch out for 1511 tomorrow, unless someone wants
to
> >>>>> whip one up tonight.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Nigel Daley <ndaley@mac.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>> I agree with Cos on fixing HDFS-1511 first. Once that is done
I'll
> >> enable hdfs patch testing.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> Nige
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone4
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Dec 17, 2010, at 7:01 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> One more issue needs to be addressed before test-patch is
turned on
> >> HDFS is
> >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1511
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>  Take care,
> >>>>>>> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 16:17, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Considering that because of these 4 faulty cases every
patch will
> be
> >>>>>>>> -1'ed a patch author will still have to look at it and
make a
> >> comment
> >>>>>>>> why this particular -1 isn't valid. Lesser work, perhaps,
but
> >> messier
> >>>>>>>> IMO. I'm not blocking it - I just feel like there's
a better way.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>  Take care,
> >>>>>>>> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 15:55, Jakob Homan <jghoman@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> If HDFS is added to the test-patch queue right
now we get
> >>>>>>>>>> nothing but dozens of -1'ed patches.
> >>>>>>>>> There aren't dozens of patches being submitted currently.
 The -1
> >>>>>>>>> isn't the important thing, it's the grunt work of
actually
> running
> >>>>>>>>> (and waiting) for the tests, test-patch, etc. that
Hudson does so
> >> that
> >>>>>>>>> the developer doesn't have to.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Dhruba Borthakur
<
> >> dhruba@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> +1, thanks for doing this.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Jakob Homan
<jghoman@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> So, with test-patch updated to show the
failing tests, saving
> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> developers the need to go and verify that
the failed tests are
> >> all
> >>>>>>>>>>> known, how do people feel about turning
on test-patch again for
> >> HDFS
> >>>>>>>>>>> and mapred?  I think it'll help prevent
any more tests from
> >> entering
> >>>>>>>>>>> the "yeah, we know" category.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>> jg
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Jakob Homan
<
> >> jhoman@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> True, each patch would get a -1 and
the failing tests would
> need
> >> to be
> >>>>>>>>>>>> verified as those known bad (BTW, it
would be great if Hudson
> >> could list
> >>>>>>>>>>>> which tests failed in the message it
posts to JIRA).  But
> that's
> >> still
> >>>>>>>>>>> quite
> >>>>>>>>>>>> a bit less error-prone work than if
the developer runs the
> tests
> >> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> test-patch themselves.  Also, with 22
being cut, there are a
> lot
> >> of
> >>>>>>>>>>> patches
> >>>>>>>>>>>> up in the air and several developers
are juggling multiple
> >> patches.  The
> >>>>>>>>>>>> more automation we can have, even if
it's not perfect, will
> >> decrease
> >>>>>>>>>>> errors
> >>>>>>>>>>>> we may make.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> -jg
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Nigel Daley wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Jakob
Homan wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's also ready to run on
MapReduce and HDFS but we won't
> >> turn it on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until these projects build
and test cleanly.  Looks like
> both
> >> these
> >>>>>>>>>>> projects
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> currently have test failures.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assuming the projects are compiling
and building, is there a
> >> reason to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not turn it on despite the test
failures? Hudson is
> invaluable
> >> to
> >>>>>>>>>>> developers
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> who then don't have to run the
tests and test-patch
> >> themselves.  We
> >>>>>>>>>>> didn't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn Hudson off when it was
working previously and there
> were
> >> known
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> failures.  I think one of the
reasons we have more failing
> >> tests now is
> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> higher cost of doing Hudson's
work (not a great excuse I
> >> know).  This
> >>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly true now because
several of the failing tests
> >> involve
> >>>>>>>>>>> tests
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> timing out, making the whole
testing regime even longer.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Every single patch would get a -1
and need investigation.
> >> Currently,
> >>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> would be about 83 investigations
between MR and HDFS issues
> >> that are in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> patch available state.  Shouldn't
we focus on getting these
> >> tests fixed
> >>>>>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> removed/?  Also, I need to get MAPREDUCE-2172
fixed (applies
> to
> >> HDFS as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> well) before I turn this on.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nige
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> Connect to me at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Todd Lipcon
> > Software Engineer, Cloudera
>
>


-- 
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera

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