hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From liushaohui <liushao...@xiaomi.com>
Subject Re: HEADSUP: Working on new 0.96.0RC
Date Sat, 12 Oct 2013 02:12:05 GMT
mr related tests may fail for

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8324

- liushaohui

On 10/12/2013 05:03 AM, Stack wrote:
> Anyone tried the 2.2 hadoop that is up for vote at the moment?  I tried our
> unit tests and got these failures:
>
> Failed tests:
> testCopyTable(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestCopyTable):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>    testStartStopRow(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestCopyTable):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testMultithreadedTableMapper(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestMultithreadedTableMapper)
>    testSimpleCase(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportExport)
>    testMetaExport(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportExport)
>
> testExportScannerBatching(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportExport)
>    testWithFilter(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportExport)
>    testWithDeletes(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportExport)
>
> testExcludeMinorCompaction(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestHFileOutputFormat)
>
> testMRIncrementalLoad(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestHFileOutputFormat)
>
> testMRIncrementalLoadWithSplit(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestHFileOutputFormat)
>    testMROnTable(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testMROnTableWithCustomMapper(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testBulkOutputWithTsvImporterTextMapper(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testBulkOutputWithAnExistingTable(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testMROnTableWithTimestamp(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testBulkOutputWithoutAnExistingTable(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestImportTsv):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>    testRowCounterNoColumn(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestRowCounter)
>
> testRowCounterHiddenColumn(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestRowCounter)
>
> testRowCounterExclusiveColumn(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestRowCounter)
>    testCombiner(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableMapReduce)
>    testMultiRegionTable(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableMapReduce)
>
> testScanEmptyToAPP(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan1)
>
> testScanEmptyToBBA(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan1)
>
> testScanEmptyToBBB(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan1)
>
> testScanEmptyToOPP(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan1)
>
> testScanEmptyToEmpty(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan1)
>    testWALPlayer(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestWALPlayer):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testScanYZYToEmpty(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testScanOPPToEmpty(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testScanYYXToEmpty(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testScanOBBToOPP(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testScanOBBToQPP(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testScanFromConfiguration(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testScanYYYToEmpty(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.mapreduce.TestTableInputFormatScan2)
>
> testExportFileSystemState(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.snapshot.TestExportSnapshot):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
> testSnapshotWithRefsExportFileSystemState(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.snapshot.TestExportSnapshot):
> expected:<0> but was:<1>
>
>
> Anyone else seeing this?
> St.Ack
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Sergey Shelukhin <sergey@hortonworks.com>wrote:
>>
>>>> Can we agree if the IT tests are green for a certain number of runs in a
>>> row, then it's stable?
>>>
>>> What do you mean by IT tests are green? Ours are mostly green lately
>>> (except for recently fixed bugs).
>>> Can you please share some investigation details? Maybe file bugs with
>>> description of symptoms, like logs and stuff; are you sure you are hitting
>>> 9696 in particular?
>>>
>> We've been trying to keep up HBASE-9696 w/ ongoing notes.  We should do
>> better for sure but big picture is that we have evidence that what is in
>> HBASE-9696 is an improvement over what we have now having had two sustained
>> runs w/o data loss.   The fix is needed so we can do long-running hbase-it
>> suites; w/o it we were just crash-landing a few hours in.
>>
>>
>>> 9696 is a very big patch too, it can introduce more bugs and will require
>>> more fixing.
>>> We do need to have some deadline where large/risky changes cannot go imho.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Agree but after reviews, I do not know how to avoid it (see 9696 and its
>> RB)
>>
>> I suggest we commit hbase-9696 as is since it an incompatible change with
>> its introduction of two new states, states that we do not seem to be able
>> to do without.  Then I cut an RC.  If further issue in 9696, we can fine
>> tune/bug-fix post release.
>>
>> On another note, a rig run that has been going for almost 24 hours has
>> gone further than any run of the last few weeks.  That is good.
>>
>> Let us know if need any more info/insight.  Almost there.
>> St.Ack
>>


Mime
View raw message