lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael McCandless <>
Subject Re: [JENKINS] Lucene-3.x - Build # 680 - Failure
Date Sat, 24 Mar 2012 13:21:53 GMT
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Robert Muir <> wrote:

>> Does the failure reproduce if you use the big line docs file?
>> (-Dtest.linedocsfile=...)?  Ie, it's still reproducible, but it's a
>> hassle because you need the big line file docs locally?

OK, I verified: it does in fact reproduce, if you use the big line file docs.

So it's not that it doesn't reproduce; it's that it "reproduces with
some hassle".

> The big line docs file locally goes way beyond hassle:
> * Where do i get it from?

I put a copy here:

I agree we should make it as easy as possible to obtain (maybe an ant
task that pulls it down for you?)...

> * I happen to know its several gigabytes in size from finding it
> before: this is a huge hassle for someone that isnt in the US on a
> fast pipe: i think its absurdly huge.

It's 1.1 GB compressed.  I imagine devs that debug these sorts of
fails would download it once and then reuse it.

I agree it's "extra work" to reproduce failures, but I think that's
the lesser evil here?  The alternative is to not discover the
bug (loss of test coverage)... eg, I'm unable to reproduce this
failure if I only use the tiny line file docs (can anyone else?).

If the "NOTE: reproduce with..." output included the
-Dtests.linedocsfile=/path/to/big/file then you'd know you need to
point it to your copy of the big line file docs.

Mike McCandless

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message