Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 37444 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2010 08:16:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 9 Sep 2010 08:16:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 29188 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 08:16:06 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-esme-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 29130 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 08:16:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 29122 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2010 08:16:04 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 08:16:04 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of vdichev@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.47] (HELO mail-qw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.216.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 08:15:58 +0000 Received: by qwa26 with SMTP id 26so154417qwa.6 for ; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 01:15:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=KhyiDRd6iT2UF+UdySDjQN84t/mQsjataGqecwLGMu0=; b=MmAUJYF9v38ukoHqTdr7kg5YpHQbvQ1lDmJpDckxVK5RGc6yizM1/OXypljS4qApSf B5DwB8++TisA9EGq9cLpVHNkVCJUNw6N6GWbXI5Kx2/PuwP2nLwKs9cjwSD1MAGkEQVv avDkMlT3MOipIqaP3/EOilbi+hRParYC5Hymw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=s++ryPHIovgBeR+x859NoNgdh2kNRmgTwVbWuOZda1Az51kxZxaWGEQB5XwvSAZWuS Fc8FyOvBiCd6CN3ErEL/ObFidB8PTlRsxmuieAUr0k/K5CypcdqmFkCuFuvDHew/4WE4 hISuvjmHRRKyMcV5nyanbOQlKzH+0JUnoLhsM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.194.73 with SMTP id dx9mr974289vcb.1.1284020136568; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 01:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: vdichev@gmail.com Received: by 10.220.175.194 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 01:15:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1007862491.841283861836558.JavaMail.hudson@aegis> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 11:15:36 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: CB09nkBjsERJFni3YKHW-gUoD2I Message-ID: Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re=3A_Hudson_build_became_unstable=3A_ESME_=BB_Apache_Ent?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?erprise_Social_Messaging_Experiment_=28ESME=29_=23339?= From: Vassil Dichev To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Actually there's conductor actor in Specs, I seem to steal ideas from there a lot lately :) The problem is that when there are multiple cascaded asyncronous calls, it doesn't work so well in practice. For instance, I can guarantee that NewMessage has been received, but the AddToMailbox might not have been received, even though it's "sent" before NewMessage. On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Ethan Jewett wrote: > Vassil, > > At some point I'm going to put your conductor actor into the API2 and > API tests. That was a great idea. (Did I already say this back when > you first checked it in? I definitely thought it :-) > > Ethan > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Vassil Dichev wrote: >> OK, after one hour and 276 times of running the TwitterAPI test >> without a failure I decided it's OK and committed. >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Vassil Dichev wrote: >>> Sorry, I had assumed I know which test failed even before reading the >>> spec description... I was wrong, and I was trying to "fix" the wrong >>> test. I now tried to apply the fix again and I'm currently running the >>> tests in a loop again. If they haven't failed after 2 hours, I will >>> commit. >>> >>> Vassil >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:26 PM, Richard Hirsch wrote: >>>> g >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Vassil Dichev wrote: >>>>> Well, it's not really a bug of the implementation, it's an >>>>> imperfection of the test. If one delivers the final product (war or >>>>> whatever it is), the tests are usually not there anyway, so I'm not >>>>> even sure it's worth a mention. >>>> >>>> Good point >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Vassil >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Richard Hirsch wrote: >>>>>> I don't see this bug has threatening 1.1 >>>>>> >>>>>> We might want to have a section in the release notes called "Known >>>>>> bugs" - this bug and the other small bugs would be added to this >>>>>> section. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you think about that? >>>>>> >>>>>> D. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:42 AM, Vassil Dichev wrote: >>>>>>> There's some good news and some bad news regarding the tests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The good news is that I managed to reproduce the failing test fairly >>>>>>> easily- running the test in a loop until it fails resulted in a fail >>>>>>> after 10-15 minutes on my machine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The bad news is that with my fixes it still fails eventually, if not faster. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This means we will probably have to revert to using the good >>>>>>> old-fashioned timeouts, which are a tradeoff between risking the test >>>>>>> to fail and slowing it down too much. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The problem is certainly not critical for release, of course, but >>>>>>> eventually I want to have more deterministic tests, but this probably >>>>>>> means some small additions to the Distributor API. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Vassil >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Vassil Dichev wrote: >>>>>>>> OK, I've setup some tests to run over the night (these are hard to >>>>>>>> reproduce) and we'll see what we get in the morning >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Richard Hirsch wrote: >>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Vassil Dichev wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I thought I had these sorted out, but obviously not. The problem is >>>>>>>>>> that there's no easy way to find out when the message is going to >>>>>>>>>> appear in the timeline, because it's asynchronous. Will try to look >>>>>>>>>> for the problem tonight. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Richard Hirsch wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> LOL - the test in the twittwerapi that I mentioned before - is no >>>>>>>>>>> failing on hudson as well - >>>>>>>>>>> https://hudson.apache.org/hudson/job/ESME/org.apache.esme$esme-server/339/ >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> No idea why >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Apache Hudson Server >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> See >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >