lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-3402) LuceneTestCase shouldn't go crazy if a test fails in an @AfterClass annotated method
Date Fri, 26 Aug 2011 05:19:29 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3402?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13091592#comment-13091592
] 

Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3402:
-------------------------------------

patch makes sure you get some sort of seed in all situations, if we fail in afterclass we
don't actually know which test method is responsible (maybe none!),
but it prints a "reproduce with (Hopefully)" in this case.

failing in LTC's tearDown() checks should now always give you a seed.

Here's what it looks like now with the same simulated situation: TestA has a afterClass that
opens a Directory, then calls fail()
In the Solr situation it should look better, since I hacked the Solr test classes to set testsFailed
= true if their afterClass checks fail, this way we won't even bother trying to close the
directory, but this is just to show it still works even without that, and TestB passes normally.

{noformat}
junit-sequential:
    [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA
    [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 1, Errors: 1, Time elapsed: 0.135 sec
    [junit] 
    [junit] ------------- Standard Error -----------------
    [junit] NOTE: reproduce with (hopefully): ant test -Dtestcase=TestA -Dtests.seed=7360d49cf342a985:0:-184b15f6f34c023d
    [junit] ------------- ---------------- ---------------
    [junit] Testcase: org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA:	FAILED
    [junit] 
    [junit] junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: 
    [junit] 	at org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA.afterClass(TestA.java:12)
    [junit] 
    [junit] 
    [junit] Testcase: org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA:	Caused an ERROR
    [junit] java.lang.AssertionError: directory of test was not closed, opened from: org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA.afterClass(TestA.java:11)
    [junit] java.lang.RuntimeException: java.lang.AssertionError: directory of test was not
closed, opened from: org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA.afterClass(TestA.java:11)
    [junit] 	at org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.afterClassLuceneTestCaseJ4(LuceneTestCase.java:462)
    [junit] 	at org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.checkResourcesAfterClass(LuceneTestCase.java:519)
    [junit] 	at org.apache.lucene.util.LuceneTestCase.afterClassLuceneTestCaseJ4(LuceneTestCase.java:430)
    [junit] 
    [junit] 
    [junit] TEST org.apache.lucene.foo.TestA FAILED
    [junit] Testsuite: org.apache.lucene.foo.TestB
    [junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Time elapsed: 0.006 sec
    [junit] 
    [junit] Tests FAILED
{noformat}


> LuceneTestCase shouldn't go crazy if a test fails in an @AfterClass annotated method
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-3402
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3402
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>         Attachments: LUCENE-3402.patch
>
>
> An example can be seen here: http://sierranevada.servebeer.com/1314308641.log
> The general problem is this: the assertions and cleanups in lucenetestcase's afterclass
should be reordered, and have better error handling.
> In this particular case these were the steps that happened:
> # AutoCommitTest didn't close its searchers, so SolrTestCaseJ4 threw an assertion exception
in its @AfterClass method.
> # Because the searcher wasn't closed, LuceneTestCase threw an assertion exception about
unclosed directories/file handles in its afterClass. Even though the test had already "failed"
it ran this assertion because testsFailed is false, since our TestWatchMan isnt aware of failures
that happen in @AfterClass methods :(
> # Because it threw this exception, it never made it to the part where it resets the random,
so the next test blew up in its BeforeClass.
> To add insult to injury, all this happened but we didnt get a random seed printed, so
we cant even hope to reproduce the situation.
> After discussion with hossman, we came up with some ideas on how to improve this, and
I'm adding some i just thought of, too:
> # try to divide up these assertions and cleanups in LuceneTestCase: we could use multiple
@AfterClass-annotated methods but then i'm not sure we can control the order, which is scary.
But one safe thing to do is to put these pieces of code in little methods and afterclass can
handle this stuff with try/finally.
> # think about exposing the testsFailed variable for subclasses that do assertions in
their @AfterClasses. otherwise you might not get a random seed, which is bad.
> # think about upgrading junit, because I know from experimentation that the TestWatchMan
(or whatever its replacement is) can "see more" of the test lifecycle and this would probably
make a lot of this much cleaner.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message