harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [buildtest] Proposal for Build Test Infrastructure Improvement
Date Wed, 18 Apr 2007 09:11:26 GMT
Hi Alexander,

Next question:
7) Suite's dependencies.

I've tried the framework with JettyScenario. So I've unpacked a bundle
with Jetty scenario into the framework dir, copied dir with tests,
commented out some lines in dataptor (so everything according to the
README.txt file) but I accidentally typed
$ ant -Dtest.suites="JettyScenario" setup
instead of
$ ant -Dtest.suites="classlib,drlvm,JettyScenario" setup

I expected that the framework would set up
classlib,drlvm,JettyScenario because JettyScenario defines in
parameters.xml dependencies on classlib,drlvm. But it set up only
JettyScenario. I've looked into the code and my impression that
dependencies defined in parameters.xml affect only in which order the
framework runs suites. Am I correct?

Also my understanding that we have the following dependencies between suites:
1) classlib - no dependencies
2) drlvm - depends on classlib only
3) all other suites - depends on classlib and drlvm

Do we have suites with other set of dependencies?

Please see other comments below.

BWT, FYI I run JettyScenario and found that it failed but overall run
passed. I see the following output:
run:
    [mkdir] Created dir:
/export/users/smishura/newinfra/build/checkouts/JettyScenario/results
    [junit] Running JettyScenario
     [java] Java Result: 139
    [junit] Tests run: 5, Failures: 1, Errors: 3, Time elapsed: 94.581 sec
    [junit] Test JettyScenario FAILED
     [java] java.net.ConnectException: localhost/127.0.0.1:4444 -
Connection refused
     [java] at org.apache.harmony.luni.net.PlainSocketImpl.connect(PlainSocketImpl.java:230)
     [java] at org.apache.harmony.luni.net.PlainSocketImpl.connect(PlainSocketImpl.java:193)
     [java] at java.net.Socket.startupSocket(Socket.java:662)
     [java] at java.net.Socket.<init>(Socket.java:214)
     [java] at org.mortbay.start.Main.stop(Main.java:526)
     [java] at org.mortbay.start.Main.main(Main.java:104)
     [java] at java.lang.reflect.VMReflection.invokeMethod(VMReflection.java)
     [java] at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:381)
     [java] at org.apache.harmony.vm.JarRunner.main(JarRunner.java:80)
   [delete] Deleting: /export/users/smishura/newinfra/build/temp/null1281662371

check-status:

run:

BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 2 minutes 10 seconds

> > > > > > What the reason for calling classlib's build in this way? Why
we have
> > > > > > to run 'ant.bat' (or 'ant.sh' for Linux) via <exec>?
> > > > >
> > > > > It's workaround for Ant's OutOfMemory problem arising after doing
the same
> > > > > by <ant> target. The <ant>-rebuild of classlib project
causes big memory
> > > > > leaks somewhere in the Ant and the further BTI execution is impossible
> > > > > becouse of arising OOM.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > As far as I remember the solution was to increase the max memory used
> > > > by Ant with setting ANT_OPTS to "-Xms256M -Xmx512M". Have you tried
> > > > this?
> > >
> > > 2Gb was not enough.
> > >
> >
> > Wow ... and do you have any idea why 512M is enough for the current
> > infra and 2Gb is not enough for the proposed one?
>
> OOE happens under CC execution on the half way of drlvm building.
> We didn't it before in one Ant project.
>

Sorry, may be my question was unclear. I asked the following: have you
investigated why the current infra is able to run the same testing
scenario (classlib+drlvm) with 512M and new one can not do it with
2Gb?

> > As I understand
> > certain ANT tasks can use a lot of memory - classlibrary complies over
> > 3500 with javac task, so we may assume that this requires a lot of
> > memory. But root cause of such essential increase (more then x4 times)
> > is somewhere in the proposed infa from my POV. Can this impose some
> > limits, for example, to a number of testing suite that the infra can
> > setup and run?
>
> Load testing of BTI could help to answer your question.
> And I didn't tried Ant 1.7. Probably it fixes some of the leaks.
>

So you think that this is ANT issue only. Right?

<SNIP>

> Yes, it is Ant-based Framework. adaptor.xml takes the
> responsibility to 'adapt' existing Test Suite for execution under this
> framework. So it's called adaptor.xml
>
> > > > BTW, if we rename build.xml=>buildtest.xml we have to type each time:
> > > > ant -f buildtest.xml.
> > >
> > > The standard usage of BTI supposes launching by means of shell scripts
> > > (buildtest.bat/.sh), not by ant launcher.
> > >
> >
> > Just to setup classlib and lanch ant with -f buildtest.xml (like DRL VM build)?
>
> No, just to say
>    > buildtest -Dtest.suites=some,selected,suites run
> and get the things working.

I meant that shell script is required to set up classpath and lanch
ant with -f buildtest.xml

Thanks,
Stepan

Mime
View raw message