river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>
Subject Re: ServiceDiscoveryManager test coverage
Date Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:16:45 GMT
On 8/21/2010 11:11 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 8/21/2010 5:31 AM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
>> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>> On 8/20/2010 11:10 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>>>> Peter Firmstone wrote:
>>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>>>>>>> As indicated in the "TaskManager Progress" thread, I think, based
>>>>>>> reading the source code, that there is a concurrency bug in
>>>>>>> ServiceDiscoveryManager.LookupCacheImpl's addProxyReg method.
>>>>>>> I added logging to see which tests I should run to evaluate a
>>>>>>> As far as I can tell, the automated system contains a single
>>>>>>> that creates a ServiceDiscoveryManager, LeaseRenewDurRFE, and
>>>>>>> does not appear to use addProxyReg.
>>>>>>> Are there any tests in addition to the QA and JTreg tests that
>>>>>>> cover this?
>>>>>> No, not in addition unfortunately.
>>>>> I didn't really expect there would be, but it was worth asking.
>>>>> I'm now working on an SDM concurrency test - essentially writing stubs
>>>>> for the classes it interacts with, so that I can control the timing of
>>>>> events. I want to hit it with a lot of different activity at the same
>>>>> time.
>>>>> Is there any existing code that would help with that task?
>>>>> Patricia
>>>> Any of the existing qa or jtreg tests that relate to the SDM would be a
>>>> good start.
>>>> Not sure which I'd pick though.
>>> I've found why I was not finding ServiceDiscoveryManager tests. "ant
>>> qa.run" in the build directory, which is how I was running QA tests,
>>> runs specified categories:
>>> "id,loader,policyprovider,locatordiscovery,activation,config,discoverymanager,joinmanager,url,iiop,jrmp,reliability,thread"
>>> Why not servicediscovery????
>>> Patricia
>> Well I'll be b...., didn't pick that up, how strange, running
>> servicediscovery now, although not with your patches, I'll try that
>> tomorrow.
> I'm running the servicediscovery tests against a modified version of
> ServiceDiscoveryManager that has a couple of short sleep calls in
> addProxyReg. It has reported several failures. I would be very
> interested in what failures, if any, you get with an unpatched SDM. If
> your version does not fail we have a real test coverage problem. If your
> version gets similar failures, we just have a problem with not running
> tests we have.

I should perhaps mention that if my sleep calls are triggering the 
failures, they are almost certainly due to the concurrency problem I 
found by inspection, which is very easy to fix. The difficult part is 
finding a test to verify the fix.


View raw message