lucene-java-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Sokolov <msoko...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Question about usage of LuceneTestCase
Date Wed, 22 Aug 2018 21:02:55 GMT
It looks to me as if this test is asserting that the segment in an index it
just created has some attributes, but in fact it does not. Perhaps there is
a codec that does not store any attributes with its segments, and Luke does
not expect this, and maybe the codec is being selected randomly by the
RandomIndexWriter?

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Here's a seed that fails for me consistently in IntelliJ:
> "FEF692F43FE50191:656E22441676701C" running CommitsImplTest. Warning: I
> have a bunch of local changes that might have perturbed the randomness so
> possibly it might not reproduce for others.  I just run the tests, open the
> "Edit Configurations" dialog, paste in
> -Dtests.seed=FEF692F43FE50191:656E22441676701C in the VM options box, and
> then I can get the test to fail every time, it seems
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 1:11 PM Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> bq. My understanding at this point is (though it may be a repeat of your
>> words,)
>> first we should find out the combinations behind the failures.
>> If there are any particular patterns, there could be bugs, so we should
>> fix
>> it.
>>
>> You don't really have to figure out exactly what the combinations are,
>> just execute the test with the "reproduce with" flags set, cut/paste
>> the error message at the root of your local Solr source tree in a
>> command prompt.
>>
>> ant test  -Dtestcase=CommitsImplTest
>> -Dtests.method=testGetSegmentAttributes -Dtests.seed=35AF58F652536895
>> -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.badapples=true -Dtests.locale=de
>> -Dtests.timezone=Africa/Kigali -Dtests.asserts=true
>> -Dtests.file.encoding=UTF-8
>>
>> That should reproduce exactly the same results from random() and
>> (hopefully) reliably reproduce the problem. Not sure how to mavenize
>> it, but you shouldn't need to if you have Solr locally. If it fails
>> every time, you can debug. I've had some luck just defining the
>> tests.seed in my IDE and running the test there (I use IntelliJ, but
>> I'm sure Eclipse and Netbeans etc. have an equivalent way to do
>> things). If just setting the seed as a sysvar in your IDE doesn't do
>> the trick, you can always define all of them in the IDE.
>>
>> Even setting all the sysvars in the IDE doesn't always work. That is
>> executing the entire test from the command line can consistently fail
>> but defining all the sysvars in the IDE succeeds. But when it does
>> fail in the IDE it makes things _much_ easier ;)
>>
>> Second question:
>>
>> I doubt there's any real point in exercising Luke on non-FS based
>> indexes, so disabling the randomization of the filesystem seems fine.
>>
>> See SolrTestCaseJ4, the "useFactory" method. You can do something like
>> this in your test:
>>
>> @BeforeClass
>> public static void beforeTriLevelCompositeIdRoutingTest() throws
>> Exception {
>>   useFactory(null); // uses Standard or NRTCaching, FS based anyway.
>> }
>>
>> or even:
>>
>> useFactory("solr.StandardDirectoryFactory");
>>
>> I'm not sure about
>> useFactory("org.apache.solr.core.HdfsDirectoryFactory");
>>
>> Or if you're really adventurous:
>>
>> @BeforeClass
>> public static void beforeTriLevelCompositeIdRoutingTest() throws
>> Exception {
>>   switch (random().nextInt(2)) {
>>      case 0:
>>         useFactory(null); // uses Standard or NRTCaching, FS based anyway.
>>         break;
>>     case 1:
>>         useFactory("org.apache.solr.core.HdfsDirectoryFactory");
>>         break;
>>     // I guess whatever else you wanted...
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>> Frankly in this case I'd:
>>
>> 1> see if executing the full reproduce line consistently fails and if so
>> 2> try using the above to disable other filesystems. If that
>> consistently succeeds, consider it done.
>>
>> Since Luke is intended to be used on an existing index I don't see
>> much use in randomizing for edge cases. But that pre-supposes that
>> it's a problem with some of the directory implementations of course...
>>
>> Best,
>> Erick
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Tomoko Uchida
>> <tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Can I ask one more question.
>> >
>> > 4> If MIke's intuition that it's one of the file system randomizations
>> > that occasionally gets hit _and_ you determine that that's an invalid
>> > test case (and for Luke requiring that the FS-basesd tests are all
>> > that are necessary may be fine) I'm pretty sure you you can disable
>> > that randomization for your specific tests.
>> >
>> > As you may know, Luke calls relatively low Lucene APIs (such as
>> > o.a.l.u.IndexCommit or SegmentInfos) to show commit points, segment
>> files,
>> > etc. ("Commits" tab do this.)
>> > I am not sure about when we could/should disable randomization, could
>> you
>> > give me any cues for this? Or, real test cases that disable
>> randomization
>> > are helpful for me, I will search Lucene/Solr code base.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Tomoko
>> >
>> > 2018年8月22日(水) 21:58 Tomoko Uchida <tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> Thanks for your kind explanations,
>> >>
>> >> sorry of course I know what is the randomization seed,
>> >> but your description and instruction is exactly what I wanted.
>> >>
>> >> > The randomization can cause different
>> >> > combinations of "stuff" to happen. Say the locale is randomized to
>> >> > Turkish and a token is also randomly generated that breaks _only_
>> with
>> >> > that combination. You'd never explicitly be able to test all of those
>> >> > kinds of combinations, thus the random() function. And there may be
>> >> > many calls to random() by the time a test is run.
>> >>
>> >> My understanding at this point is (though it may be a repeat of your
>> >> words,)
>> >> first we should find out the combinations behind the failures.
>> >> If there are any particular patterns, there could be bugs, so we should
>> >> fix it.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Tomoko
>> >>
>> >> 2018年8月22日(水) 14:59 Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >>> The pseudo-random generator in the Lucene test framework is used to
>> >>> randomize lots of test conditions, we're talking about the file system
>> >>> implementation here, but there are lots of others. Whenever you see
a
>> >>> call to random().whatever, that's the call to the framework's method.
>> >>>
>> >>> But here's the thing. The randomization can cause different
>> >>> combinations of "stuff" to happen. Say the locale is randomized to
>> >>> Turkish and a token is also randomly generated that breaks _only_ with
>> >>> that combination. You'd never explicitly be able to test all of those
>> >>> kinds of combinations, thus the random() function. And there may be
>> >>> many calls to random() by the time a test is run.
>> >>>
>> >>> Here's the key. When "seeded" with the same number, the calls to
>> >>> random() produce the exact same output every time. So say with seed1
I
>> >>> get
>> >>> nextInt() - 1
>> >>> nextInt() - 67
>> >>> nextBool() - true
>> >>>
>> >>> Whenever I use 1 as the seed, I'll get exactly the above. However, if
>> >>> I use 2 as a seed, I might get
>> >>> nextInt() - 93
>> >>> nextInt() - 63
>> >>> nextBool() - false
>> >>>
>> >>> So the short form is
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. randomization is used to try out various combinations.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2. using a particular seed guarantees that the randomization is
>> >>> repeatable.
>> >>>
>> >>> 3.  when a test fails with a particular seed, running the test with
>> >>> the _same_ seed will produce the same conditions, hopefully allowing
>> >>> that particular error resulting from that particular combination to
be
>> >>> reproduced reliably (and fixed).
>> >>>
>> >>> 4. at least that's the theory and in practice it works quite well.
>> >>> There is no _guarantee_ that the test will fail using the same seed,
>> >>> sometimes the failures are a result of subtle timing etc, which is not
>> >>> under control of the randomization. I breathe a sigh of relief,
>> >>> though, when a test _does_ reproduce with a particular seed 'cause
>> >>> then I have a hope of knowing the issue is actually fixed ;).
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Best,
>> >>> Erick
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Tomoko Uchida
>> >>> <tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > Thanks a lot for your information & insights,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I will try to reproduce the errors and investigate the results.
>> >>> > And, maybe I should learn more about internal of the test framework,
>> >>> > I'm not familiar with it and still do not understand what does
>> "seed"
>> >>> means
>> >>> > exactly in this context.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Regards,
>> >>> > Tomoko
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 2018年8月22日(水) 1:05 Erick Erickson <erickerickson@gmail.com>:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> Couple of things (and I know you've been around for a while,
so
>> pardon
>> >>> >> me if it's all old hat to you):
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 1> if you run the entire "reproduce with" line and can get
a
>> >>> >> consistent failure, then you are half way there, nothing is
as
>> >>> >> frustrating as not getting failures reliably. The critical
bit is
>> >>> >> often the -Dtests.seed. As Michael mentioned, there are various
>> >>> >> randomizations done for _many_ things in Lucene tests using
a
>> random
>> >>> >> generator.  tests.seed, well, seeds that generator so it produces
>> the
>> >>> >> same numbers every time it's run with that seed. You'll see
lots of
>> >>> >> calls to a static ramdom() method calls. I'll add that if you
want
>> to
>> >>> >> use randomness in your tests, use that method and do _not_
use a
>> local
>> >>> >> instance of Java's Random.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 2> MIke: You say IntelliJ succeeds. But that'll use a new
random()
>> >>> >> seed. Once you run a test, in the upper right (on my version
at
>> >>> >> least), IntelliJ will show you a little box with the test name
and
>> you
>> >>> >> can "edit configurations" on it. I often have luck by editing
the
>> >>> >> configuration and adding the test seed to the "VM option" box
for
>> the
>> >>> >> test, just the "-Dtests.seed=35AF58F652536895" part. You can
add
>> all
>> >>> >> of the -D flags in the "reproduce with" line if you want, but
often
>> >>> >> just the seed works for me. If that works and you track it
down, do
>> >>> >> remember to take that seed _out_ of the "VM options" box rather
>> than
>> >>> >> forget it as I have done ;)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 3> Mark Miller's beasting script can be used to run a zillion
tests
>> >>> >> over night:
>> https://gist.github.com/markrmiller/dbdb792216dc98b018ad
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> 4> If MIke's intuition that it's one of the file system
>> randomizations
>> >>> >> that occasionally gets hit _and_ you determine that that's
an
>> invalid
>> >>> >> test case (and for Luke requiring that the FS-basesd tests
are all
>> >>> >> that are necessary may be fine) I'm pretty sure you you can
disable
>> >>> >> that randomization for your specific tests.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Best,
>> >>> >> Erick
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 7:47 AM, Tomoko Uchida
>> >>> >> <tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> > Hi, Mike
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Thanks for sharing your experiments.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >> CommitsImplTest.testListCommits
>> >>> >> >> CommitsImplTest.testGetCommit_generation_notfound
>> >>> >> >> CommitsImplTest.testGetSegments
>> >>> >> >> DocumentsImplTest.testGetDocumentFIelds
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > I also found CommitsImplTest and DocumentsImplTest fail
>> frequently,
>> >>> >> > especially CommitsImplTest is unhappy with lucene test
framework
>> (I
>> >>> >> pointed
>> >>> >> > that in my previous post.)
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >> I wonder if this is somehow related to running mvn
from command
>> >>> line vs
>> >>> >> > running in IntelliJ since previously I was doing the latter
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > In my personal experience, when I was running those suspicious
>> tests
>> >>> on
>> >>> >> > IntelliJ IDEA, they were always green - but I am not sure
that
>> `mvn
>> >>> test`
>> >>> >> > is the cause.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > Thanks,
>> >>> >> > Tomoko
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > 2018年8月21日(火) 22:53 Michael Sokolov <msokolov@gmail.com>:
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >> I was running these luke tests a bunch and found the
following
>> tests
>> >>> >> fail
>> >>> >> >> intermittently; pretty frequently. Once I @Ignore
them I can
>> get a
>> >>> >> >> consistent pass:
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> CommitsImplTest.testListCommits
>> >>> >> >> CommitsImplTest.testGetCommit_generation_notfound
>> >>> >> >> CommitsImplTest.testGetSegments
>> >>> >> >> DocumentsImplTest.testGetDocumentFIelds
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> I did not attempt to figure out why the tests were
failing, but
>> to
>> >>> do
>> >>> >> that,
>> >>> >> >> I would:
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Run repeatedly until you get a failure -- save the
test "seed"
>> from
>> >>> this
>> >>> >> >> run that should be printed out in the failure message
Then you
>> >>> should be
>> >>> >> >> able to reliably reproduce this failure by re-running
with
>> system
>> >>> >> property
>> >>> >> >> "tests.seed" set to that value. This is used to initialize
the
>> >>> >> >> randomization that LuceneTestCase does.
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> My best guess is that the failures may have to do
with randomly
>> >>> using
>> >>> >> some
>> >>> >> >> Directory implementation or other Lucene feature that
Luke
>> doesn't
>> >>> >> properly
>> >>> >> >> handle?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> Hmm I was trying this again to see if I could get
an example,
>> and
>> >>> >> strangely
>> >>> >> >> these tests are no longer failing for me after several
runs,
>> when
>> >>> >> >> previously they failed quite often. I wonder if this
is somehow
>> >>> related
>> >>> >> to
>> >>> >> >> running mvn from command line vs running in IntelliJ
since
>> >>> previously I
>> >>> >> was
>> >>> >> >> doing the latter
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> -Mike
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 9:01 AM Tomoko Uchida <
>> >>> >> >> tomoko.uchida.1111@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> >> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >> > Hello,
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Could you give me some advice or comments about
usage of
>> >>> >> LuceneTestCase.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Some of our unit tests extending LuceneTestCase
fail by
>> assertion
>> >>> >> error
>> >>> >> >> --
>> >>> >> >> > sometimes, randomly.
>> >>> >> >> > I suppose we use LuceneTestCase in inappropriate
way, but
>> cannot
>> >>> find
>> >>> >> out
>> >>> >> >> > how to fix it.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Here is some information about failed tests.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >  * The full test code is here:
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> https://github.com/DmitryKey/luke/blob/master/src/test/java/org/apache/lucene/luke/models/commits/CommitsImplTest.java
>> >>> >> >> >  * We run tests by `mvn test` on Mac PC or Travis
CI (oracle
>> >>> >> jdk8/9/10,
>> >>> >> >> > openjdk 8/9/10), assertion errors occur regardless
of
>> platform or
>> >>> jdk
>> >>> >> >> > version.
>> >>> >> >> >  * Stack trace of an assertion error is at the
end of this
>> mail.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Any advice are appreciated. Please tell me if
more
>> information is
>> >>> >> needed.
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > Thanks,
>> >>> >> >> > Tomoko
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> >> >  T E S T S
>> >>> >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> >> > Running org.apache.lucene.luke.models.commits.CommitsImplTest
>> >>> >> >> > NOTE: reproduce with: ant test  -Dtestcase=CommitsImplTest
>> >>> >> >> > -Dtests.method=testGetSegmentAttributes
>> >>> -Dtests.seed=35AF58F652536895
>> >>> >> >> > -Dtests.slow=true -Dtests.badapples=true -Dtests.locale=de
>> >>> >> >> > -Dtests.timezone=Africa/Kigali -Dtests.asserts=true
>> >>> >> >> > -Dtests.file.encoding=UTF-8
>> >>> >> >> > NOTE: leaving temporary files on disk at:
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> /private/var/folders/xr/mrs6w1m15y1f4wkgfhn_x1dm0000gp/T/lucene.luke.models.commits.CommitsImplTest_35AF58F652536895-001
>> >>> >> >> > NOTE: test params are:
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> codec=HighCompressionCompressingStoredFields(storedFieldsFormat=CompressingStoredFieldsFormat(compressionMode=HIGH_COMPRESSION,
>> >>> >> >> > chunkSize=6, maxDocsPerChunk=7, blockSize=2),
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> termVectorsFormat=CompressingTermVectorsFormat(compressionMode=HIGH_COMPRESSION,
>> >>> >> >> > chunkSize=6, blockSize=2)),
>> sim=RandomSimilarity(queryNorm=true):
>> >>> {},
>> >>> >> >> > locale=de, timezone=Africa/Kigali
>> >>> >> >> > NOTE: Mac OS X 10.13.6 x86_64/Oracle Corporation
1.8.0_181
>> >>> >> >> > (64-bit)/cpus=4,threads=1,free=201929064,total=257425408
>> >>> >> >> > NOTE: All tests run in this JVM: [CommitsImplTest]
>> >>> >> >> > Tests run: 13, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped:
0, Time
>> elapsed:
>> >>> 1.44
>> >>> >> sec
>> >>> >> >> > <<< FAILURE!
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> testGetSegmentAttributes(org.apache.lucene.luke.models.commits.CommitsImplTest)
>> >>> >> >> > Time elapsed: 0.047 sec  <<< FAILURE!
>> >>> >> >> > java.lang.AssertionError
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>>
>> __randomizedtesting.SeedInfo.seed([35AF58F652536895:AE37E8467BC01918]:0)
>> >>> >> >> > at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:92)
>> >>> >> >> > at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:43)
>> >>> >> >> > at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:54)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.luke.models.commits.CommitsImplTest.testGetSegmentAttributes(CommitsImplTest.java:151)
>> >>> >> >> > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native
Method)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
>> >>> >> >> > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner.invoke(RandomizedRunner.java:1737)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner$8.evaluate(RandomizedRunner.java:934)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner$9.evaluate(RandomizedRunner.java:970)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner$10.evaluate(RandomizedRunner.java:984)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleSetupTeardownChained$1.evaluate(TestRuleSetupTeardownChained.java:49)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.AbstractBeforeAfterRule$1.evaluate(AbstractBeforeAfterRule.java:45)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleThreadAndTestName$1.evaluate(TestRuleThreadAndTestName.java:48)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleIgnoreAfterMaxFailures$1.evaluate(TestRuleIgnoreAfterMaxFailures.java:64)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleMarkFailure$1.evaluate(TestRuleMarkFailure.java:47)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.StatementAdapter.evaluate(StatementAdapter.java:36)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.ThreadLeakControl$StatementRunner.run(ThreadLeakControl.java:368)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.ThreadLeakControl.forkTimeoutingTask(ThreadLeakControl.java:817)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.ThreadLeakControl$3.evaluate(ThreadLeakControl.java:468)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner.runSingleTest(RandomizedRunner.java:943)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner$5.evaluate(RandomizedRunner.java:829)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner$6.evaluate(RandomizedRunner.java:879)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.RandomizedRunner$7.evaluate(RandomizedRunner.java:890)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.AbstractBeforeAfterRule$1.evaluate(AbstractBeforeAfterRule.java:45)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.StatementAdapter.evaluate(StatementAdapter.java:36)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleStoreClassName$1.evaluate(TestRuleStoreClassName.java:41)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.NoShadowingOrOverridesOnMethodsRule$1.evaluate(NoShadowingOrOverridesOnMethodsRule.java:40)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.NoShadowingOrOverridesOnMethodsRule$1.evaluate(NoShadowingOrOverridesOnMethodsRule.java:40)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.StatementAdapter.evaluate(StatementAdapter.java:36)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.StatementAdapter.evaluate(StatementAdapter.java:36)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.StatementAdapter.evaluate(StatementAdapter.java:36)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleAssertionsRequired$1.evaluate(TestRuleAssertionsRequired.java:53)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleMarkFailure$1.evaluate(TestRuleMarkFailure.java:47)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleIgnoreAfterMaxFailures$1.evaluate(TestRuleIgnoreAfterMaxFailures.java:64)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> org.apache.lucene.util.TestRuleIgnoreTestSuites$1.evaluate(TestRuleIgnoreTestSuites.java:54)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.rules.StatementAdapter.evaluate(StatementAdapter.java:36)
>> >>> >> >> > at
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> com.carrotsearch.randomizedtesting.ThreadLeakControl$StatementRunner.run(ThreadLeakControl.java:368)
>> >>> >> >> > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
>> >>> >> >> >
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> > --
>> >>> >> > Tomoko Uchida
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > --
>> >>> > Tomoko Uchida
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Tomoko Uchida
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Tomoko Uchida
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-help@lucene.apache.org
>>
>>

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