hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
Subject Re: recent 0.94 failures
Date Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:02:05 GMT
More failures. Once TestSplitTransactionOnCluster didn't finish. In the last run TestHBaseFsck
did not finish.

-- Lars



________________________________
 From: Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
To: dev@hbase.apache.org; lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> 
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 7:11 AM
Subject: Re: recent 0.94 failures
 

Looking at https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.94/771/console :

[INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
[INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Total time: 44:01.553s

FYI

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:16 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:

Got a lot of failed tests that I have not seen failing at before.
>It looks like the test VMs collectively got slower. Testtimes are up from ~45mins to ~70mins
>
>Lots the recent failures are because of tests timing out.
>
>
>-- Lars
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org>
>To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:26 PM
>
>Subject: Re: recent 0.94 failures
>
>Hmm... Also got a successful run now.
>Maybe it was a temporary env issue. It is just strange that the same test would fail twice
in a row suddenly, along with other test that have not failed in a while.
>
>Looking at the runtime of TestMiniClusterLoadParallel on Ubuntu1 it tooK 104s. In the
latest run on Ubuntu5 it took 292s.
>In the failed runs it over 500s.
>
>-- Lars
>________________________________
>From: Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
>To: dev@hbase.apache.org; lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:34 PM
>Subject: Re: recent 0.94 failures
>
>I ran the tests 4 rounds and they all passed:
>1046  ~/runtest.sh 4
>TestLruBlockCache,TestMiniClusterLoadParallel,TestLruBlockCache,TestCompactionState,TestRSKilledWhenMasterInitializing
>
>FYI
>
>On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Lars:
>> Here is what I put in HBASE-7638:
>>
>> Sergey and I looked at the patch.
>> There is no potential for NullPointerException similar to what HBASE-7268
>> addendum fixes.
>> See deleteCachedLocation():
>> {code}
>>           if (oldLocation != null) {
>>             isStaleDelete = (source != null) &&
>> !oldLocation.equals(source);
>> {code}
>> I also ran the tests that failed in recent 0.94 builds and they all passed:
>>
>>  1041  mt -Dtest=TestLruBlockCache,TestMiniClusterLoadParallel
>>  1042  mt -Dtest=TestLruBlockCache
>>  1043  mt -Dtest=TestCompactionState
>>  1044  mt -Dtest=TestRSKilledWhenMasterInitializing
>>
>> I would also loop the above tests to see if I can get test failure.
>>
>> I understand it is important to have a green 0.94 build. So whether / what
>> to roll back is up to you.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:03 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.94/
>>>
>>>
>>> Prime suspects are: HBASE-7599 (Devaraj), and HBASE-7638 (Sergey).
>>> If anybody has any ideas.
>>>
>>> Otherwise I'll start with reverting these changes.
>>>
>>> -- Lars
>>>
>>
>>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message