hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Allen Wittenauer ...@altiscale.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] project for pre-commit patch testing (was Re: upstream jenkins build broken?)
Date Tue, 16 Jun 2015 03:36:22 GMT

	I'm clearly +1 on this idea.  As part of the rewrite in Hadoop of test-patch, it was amazing
to see how far and wide this bit of code as spread.  So I see consolidating everyone's efforts
as a huge win for a large number of projects.  (esp considering how many I saw suffering from
a variety of identified bugs! )


	I think it's important for people involved in those other projects to speak up and voice
an opinion as to whether this is useful. 

To summarize:

	In the short term, a single location to get/use a precommit patch tester rather than everyone
building/supporting their own in their spare time. 

	 FWIW, we've already got the code base modified to be pluggable.  We've written some basic/simple
plugins that support Hadoop, HBase, Tajo, Tez, Pig, and Flink.  For HBase and Flink, this
does include their custom checks.  Adding support for other project shouldn't be hard.  Simple
projects take almost no time after seeing the basic pattern.

	I think it's worthwhile highlighting that means support for both JIRA and GitHub as well
as Ant and Maven from the same code base.

Longer term:

	Well, we clearly have ideas of things that we want to do. Adding more features to test-patch
(review board? gradle?) is obvious. But what about teasing apart and generalizing some of
the other shell bits from projects? A common library for building CLI tools to fault injection
to release documentation creation tools to …  I'd even like to see us get as advanced as
a "run this program to auto-generate daemon stop/start bits".

	I had a few chats with people about this idea at Hadoop Summit.  What's truly exciting are
the ideas that people had once they realized what kinds of problems we're trying to solve.
 It's always amazing the problems that projects have that could be solved by these types of
solutions.  Let's stop hiding our cool toys in this area.

	So, what feedback and ideas do you have in this area?  Are you a yay or a nay?

On Jun 15, 2015, at 4:47 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Oof. I had meant to push on this again but life got in the way and now the
> June board meeting is upon us. Sorry everyone. In the event that this ends
> up contentious, hopefully one of the copied communities can give us a
> branch to work in.
> I know everyone is busy, so here's the short version of this email: I'd
> like to move some of the code currently in Hadoop (test-patch) into a new
> TLP focused on QA tooling. I'm not sure what the best format for priming
> this conversation is. ORC filled in the incubator project proposal
> template, but I'm not sure how much that confused the issue. So to start,
> I'll just write what I'm hoping we can accomplish in general terms here.
> All software development projects that are community based (that is,
> accepting outside contributions) face a common QA problem for vetting
> in-coming contributions. Hadoop is fortunate enough to be sufficiently
> popular that the weight of the problem drove tool development (i.e.
> test-patch). That tool is generalizable enough that a bunch of other TLPs
> have adopted their own forks. Unfortunately, in most projects this kind of
> QA work is an enabler rather than a primary concern, so often the tooling
> is worked on ad-hoc and little shared improvements happen across
> projects. Since
> the tooling itself is never a primary concern, any made is rarely reused
> outside of ASF projects.
> Over the last couple months a few of us have been working on generalizing
> the tooling present in the Hadoop code base (because it was the most mature
> out of all those in the various projects) and it's reached a point where we
> think we can start bringing on other downstream users. This means we need
> to start establishing things like a release cadence and to grow the new
> contributors we have to handle more project responsibility. Personally, I
> think that means it's time to move out from under Hadoop to drive things as
> our own community. Eventually, I hope the community can help draw in a
> group of folks traditionally underrepresented in ASF projects, namely QA
> and operations folks.
> I think test-patch by itself has enough scope to justify a project. Having
> a solid set of build tools that are customizable to fit the norms of
> different software communities is a bunch of work. Making it work well in
> both the context of automated test systems like Jenkins and for individual
> developers is even more work. We could easily also take over maintenance of
> things like shelldocs, since test-patch is the primary consumer of that
> currently but it's generally useful tooling.
> In addition to test-patch, I think the proposed project has some future
> growth potential. Given some adoption of test-patch to prove utility, the
> project could build on the ties it makes to start building tools to help
> projects do their own longer-run testing. Note that I'm talking about the
> tools to build QA processes and not a particular set of tested components.
> Specifically, I think the ChaosMonkey work that's in HBase should be
> generalizable as a fault injection framework (either based on that code or
> something like it). Doing this for arbitrary software is obviously very
> difficult, and a part of easing that will be to make (and then favor)
> tooling to allow projects to have operational glue that looks the same.
> Namely, the shell work that's been done in hadoop-functions.sh would be a
> great foundational layer that could bring good daemon handling practices to
> a whole slew of software projects. In the event that these frameworks and
> tools get adopted by parts of the Hadoop ecosystem, that could make the job
> of i.e. Bigtop substantially easier.
> I've reached out to a few folks who have been involved in the current
> test-patch work or expressed interest in helping out on getting it used in
> other projects. Right now, the proposed PMC would be (alphabetical by last
> name):
> * Andrew Bayer (ASF member, incubator pmc, bigtop pmc, flume pmc, jclouds
> pmc, sqoop pmc, all around Jenkins expert)
> * Sean Busbey (ASF member, accumulo pmc, hbase pmc)
> * Nick Dimiduk (hbase pmc, phoenix pmc)
> * Chris Nauroth (ASF member, incubator pmc, hadoop pmc)
> * Andrew Purtell  (ASF member, incubator pmc, bigtop pmc, hbase pmc,
> phoenix pmc)
> * Allen Wittenauer (hadoop committer)
> That PMC gives us several members and a bunch of folks familiar with the
> ASF. Combined with the code already existing in Apache spaces, I think that
> gives us sufficient justification for a direct board proposal.
> The planned project name is "Apache Yetus". It's an archaic genus of sea
> snail and most of our project will be focused on shell scripts.
> N.b.: this does not mean that the Hadoop community would _have_ to rely on
> the new TLP, but I hope that once we have a release that can be evaluated
> there'd be enough benefit to strongly encourage it.
> This has mostly been focused on scope and community issues, and I'd love to
> talk through any feedback on that. Additionally, are there any other points
> folks want to make sure are covered before we have a resolution?
> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 10:43 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> Sorry for the resend. I figured this deserves a [DISCUSS] flag.
>> On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Folks!
>>> After working on test-patch with other folks for the last few months, I
>>> think we've reached the point where we can make the fastest progress
>>> towards the goal of a general use pre-commit patch tester by spinning
>>> things into a project focused on just that. I think we have a mature enough
>>> code base and a sufficient fledgling community, so I'm going to put
>>> together a tlp proposal.
>>> Thanks for the feedback thus far from use within Hadoop. I hope we can
>>> continue to make things more useful.
>>> -Sean
>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>>> HBase's dev-support folder is where the scripts and support files live.
>>>> We've only recently started adding anything to the maven builds that's
>>>> specific to jenkins[1]; so far it's diagnostic stuff, but that's where I'd
>>>> add in more if we ran into the same permissions problems y'all are having.
>>>> There's also our precommit job itself, though it isn't large[2]. AFAIK,
>>>> we don't properly back this up anywhere, we just notify each other of
>>>> changes on a particular mail thread[3].
>>>> [1]: https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/pom.xml#L1687
>>>> [2]: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/ (they're all
>>>> read because I just finished fixing "mvn site" running out of permgen)
>>>> [3]: http://s.apache.org/NT0
>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Chris Nauroth <cnauroth@hortonworks.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Sure, thanks Sean!  Do we just look in the dev-support folder in the
>>>>> HBase
>>>>> repo?  Is there any additional context we need to be aware of?
>>>>> Chris Nauroth
>>>>> Hortonworks
>>>>> http://hortonworks.com/
>>>>> On 3/11/15, 2:44 PM, "Sean Busbey" <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>>>>> +dev@hbase
>>>>>> HBase has recently been cleaning up our precommit jenkins jobs to
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> more robust. From what I can tell our stuff started off as an earlier
>>>>>> version of what Hadoop uses for testing.
>>>>>> Folks on either side open to an experiment of combining our precommit
>>>>>> check
>>>>>> tooling? In principle we should be looking for the same kinds of
>>>>> things.
>>>>>> Naturally we'll still need different jenkins jobs to handle different
>>>>>> resource needs and we'd need to figure out where stuff eventually
>>>>> lives,
>>>>>> but that could come later.
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Chris Nauroth <
>>>>> cnauroth@hortonworks.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> The only thing I'm aware of is the failOnError option:
>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-clean-plugin/examples/ignoring-erro
>>>>>>> rs
>>>>>>> .html
>>>>>>> I prefer that we don't disable this, because ignoring different
>>>>> kinds of
>>>>>>> failures could leave our build directories in an indeterminate
>>>>>>> For
>>>>>>> example, we could end up with an old class file on the classpath
>>>>>>> test
>>>>>>> runs that was supposedly deleted.
>>>>>>> I think it's worth exploring Eddy's suggestion to try simulating
>>>>> failure
>>>>>>> by placing a file where the code expects to see a directory.
>>>>> might
>>>>>>> even let us enable some of these tests that are skipped on Windows,
>>>>>>> because Windows allows access for the owner even after permissions
>>>>> have
>>>>>>> been stripped.
>>>>>>> Chris Nauroth
>>>>>>> Hortonworks
>>>>>>> http://hortonworks.com/
>>>>>>> On 3/11/15, 2:10 PM, "Colin McCabe" <cmccabe@alumni.cmu.edu>
>>>>>>>> Is there a maven plugin or setting we can use to simply remove
>>>>>>>> directories that have no executable permissions on them?
 Clearly we
>>>>>>>> have the permission to do this from a technical point of
view (since
>>>>>>>> we created the directories as the jenkins user), it's simply
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> code refuses to do it.
>>>>>>>> Otherwise I guess we can just fix those tests...
>>>>>>>> Colin
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Lei Xu <lei@cloudera.com>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks a lot for looking into HDFS-7722, Chris.
>>>>>>>>> In HDFS-7722:
>>>>>>>>> TestDataNodeVolumeFailureXXX tests reset data dir permissions
>>>>>>>>> TearDown().
>>>>>>>>> TestDataNodeHotSwapVolumes reset permissions in a finally
>>>>>>>>> Also I ran mvn test several times on my machine and all
>>>>> passed.
>>>>>>>>> However, since in DiskChecker#checkDirAccess():
>>>>>>>>> private static void checkDirAccess(File dir) throws
>>>>>>> DiskErrorException {
>>>>>>>>>  if (!dir.isDirectory()) {
>>>>>>>>>    throw new DiskErrorException("Not a directory: "
>>>>>>>>>                                 + dir.toString());
>>>>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>>>>  checkAccessByFileMethods(dir);
>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>> One potentially safer alternative is replacing data dir
with a
>>>>>>> regular
>>>>>>>>> file to stimulate disk failures.
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Chris Nauroth
>>>>>>>>> <cnauroth@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> TestDataNodeHotSwapVolumes, TestDataNodeVolumeFailure,
>>>>>>>>>> TestDataNodeVolumeFailureReporting, and
>>>>>>>>>> TestDataNodeVolumeFailureToleration all remove executable
>>>>>>> permissions
>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>> directories like the one Colin mentioned to simulate
>>>>> failures
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>> data
>>>>>>>>>> nodes.  I reviewed the code for all of those, and
they all appear
>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>>>>> doing the necessary work to restore executable permissions
at the
>>>>>>> end
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> the test.  The only recent uncommitted patch I¹ve
seen that makes
>>>>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>> in these test suites is HDFS-7722.  That patch still
looks fine
>>>>>>>>>> though.  I
>>>>>>>>>> don¹t know if there are other uncommitted patches
that changed
>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>>> test
>>>>>>>>>> suites.
>>>>>>>>>> I suppose it¹s also possible that the JUnit process
>>>>>>> died
>>>>>>>>>> after removing executable permissions but before
restoring them.
>>>>>>> That
>>>>>>>>>> always would have been a weakness of these test suites,
>>>>> regardless
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>> recent changes.
>>>>>>>>>> Chris Nauroth
>>>>>>>>>> Hortonworks
>>>>>>>>>> http://hortonworks.com/
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/15, 1:47 PM, "Aaron T. Myers" <atm@cloudera.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Colin,
>>>>>>>>>>> I asked Andrew Bayer, who works with Apache Infra,
what's going
>>>>> on
>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> these boxes. He took a look and concluded that
some perms are
>>>>> being
>>>>>>>>>>> set in
>>>>>>>>>>> those directories by our unit tests which are
precluding those
>>>>> files
>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>> getting deleted. He's going to clean up the boxes
for us, but we
>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>>>> expect this to keep happening until we can fix
the test in
>>>>> question
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> properly clean up after itself.
>>>>>>>>>>> To help narrow down which commit it was that
started this, Andrew
>>>>>>> sent
>>>>>>>>>>> me
>>>>>>>>>>> this info:
>>>>>>>>>>> "/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/PreCommit-HDFS-
>>>>>>>>>>> Build/hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs/target/test/data/dfs/data/data3
>>>>>>>>>>> /
>>>>>>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>> 500 perms, so I'm guessing that's the problem.
Been that way
>>>>> since
>>>>>>> 9:32
>>>>>>>>>>> UTC
>>>>>>>>>>> on March 5th."
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Aaron T. Myers
>>>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Colin P. McCabe
>>>>>>> <cmccabe@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>> A very quick (and not thorough) survey shows
that I can't find
>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>> jenkins jobs that succeeded from the last
24 hours.  Most of
>>>>> them
>>>>>>>>>>>> seem
>>>>>>>>>>>> to be failing with some variant of this message:
>>>>>>>>>>>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-clean-plugin:2.5:clean
>>>>>>> (default-clean)
>>>>>>>>>>>> on project hadoop-hdfs: Failed to clean project:
Failed to
>>>>> delete
>>>>>>>>>>>> /home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/PreCommit-HDFS-Build/hadoop-hd
>>>>>>>>>>>> fs
>>>>>>>>>>>> -pr
>>>>>>>>>>>> oject/hadoop-hdfs/target/test/data/dfs/data/data3
>>>>>>>>>>>> -> [Help 1]
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any ideas how this happened?  Bad disk, unit
test setting wrong
>>>>>>>>>>>> permissions?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Colin
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Lei (Eddy) Xu
>>>>>>>>> Software Engineer, Cloudera
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sean
>>>> --
>>>> Sean
>>> --
>>> Sean
>> --
>> Sean
> -- 
> Sean

View raw message