hive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vihang Karajgaonkar <vih...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: reverting test-breaking changes
Date Thu, 22 Feb 2018 18:31:55 GMT
+1
Commenting on JIRA and giving a 24hr heads-up (excluding weekends) would be
good.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Alan Gates <alanfgates@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1.
>
> Alan.
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Thejas Nair <thejas.nair@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > I agree, this makes sense. The number of failures keeps increasing.
> > A 24 hour heads up in either case before revert would be good.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 2:45 AM, Peter Vary <pvary@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree with Zoltan. The continuously braking tests make it very hard
> to
> > > spot real issues.
> > > Any thoughts on doing it automatically?
> > >
> > > > On Feb 22, 2018, at 10:47 AM, Zoltan Haindrich <kirk@rxd.hu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > > In the last couple weeks the number of broken tests have started to
> go
> > > up...and even tho I run bisect/etc from time to time ; sometimes people
> > > don’t react to my comments/tickets/etc.
> > > >
> > > > Because keeping this many failing tests makes it easier for a new one
> > to
> > > slip in...I think reverting the patch introducing the test failures
> would
> > > also help in some case.
> > > >
> > > > I think it would help a lot to prevent further test breaks to revert
> > the
> > > patch if any of the following conditions is met:
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > C1) if the notification/comment about the fact that the patch indeed
> > > broken a test somehow have been unanswered for at least 24 hours.
> > > >
> > > > C2) if the patch is in for 7 days; but the test failure is still not
> > > addressed (note that in this case there might be a conversation about
> > > fixing it...but in this case ; to enable other people to work in a
> > cleaner
> > > environment is more important than a single patch - and if it can't be
> > > fixed in 7 days...well it might not get fixed in a month).
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > I would like to also note that I've seen a few tickets which have
> been
> > > picked up by people who were not involved in creating the original
> > change -
> > > and although the intention was good, they might miss the context of the
> > > original patch and may "fix" the tests in the wrong way: accept a q.out
> > > which is inappropriate or ignore the test...
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > would it be ok to implement this from now on? because it makes my
> > > efforts practically useless if people are not reacting…
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > note: just to be on the same page - this is only about running a
> single
> > > test which falls on its own - I feel that flaky tests are an entirely
> > > different topic.
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Zoltan
> > > >
> > > > **
> > > > *
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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