Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
HBase >> mail # dev >> recent 0.94 failures


+
lars hofhansl 2013-01-24, 04:03
+
Ted Yu 2013-01-24, 04:07
+
Ted Yu 2013-01-24, 04:34
+
lars hofhansl 2013-01-24, 05:26
+
lars hofhansl 2013-01-25, 07:16
+
Ted Yu 2013-01-25, 15:11
+
lars hofhansl 2013-01-25, 22:02
Copy link to this message
-
Re: recent 0.94 failures
I see some timeout failures of trunk too. May these be produced by the
same cause?

On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:02 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> More failures. Once TestSplitTransactionOnCluster didn't finish. In the last run TestHBaseFsck did not finish.
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 7:11 AM
> Subject: Re: recent 0.94 failures
>
>
> Looking at https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.94/771/console :
>
> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> [INFO] ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Total time: 44:01.553s
>
> FYI
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:16 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Got a lot of failed tests that I have not seen failing at before.
>>It looks like the test VMs collectively got slower. Testtimes are up from ~45mins to ~70mins
>>
>>Lots the recent failures are because of tests timing out.
>>
>>
>>-- Lars
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> From: lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:26 PM
>>
>>Subject: Re: recent 0.94 failures
>>
>>Hmm... Also got a successful run now.
>>Maybe it was a temporary env issue. It is just strange that the same test would fail twice in a row suddenly, along with other test that have not failed in a while.
>>
>>Looking at the runtime of TestMiniClusterLoadParallel on Ubuntu1 it tooK 104s. In the latest run on Ubuntu5 it took 292s.
>>In the failed runs it over 500s.
>>
>>-- Lars
>>________________________________
>>From: Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 8:34 PM
>>Subject: Re: recent 0.94 failures
>>
>>I ran the tests 4 rounds and they all passed:
>>1046  ~/runtest.sh 4
>>TestLruBlockCache,TestMiniClusterLoadParallel,TestLruBlockCache,TestCompactionState,TestRSKilledWhenMasterInitializing
>>
>>FYI
>>
>>On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Lars:
>>> Here is what I put in HBASE-7638:
>>>
>>> Sergey and I looked at the patch.
>>> There is no potential for NullPointerException similar to what HBASE-7268
>>> addendum fixes.
>>> See deleteCachedLocation():
>>> {code}
>>>           if (oldLocation != null) {
>>>             isStaleDelete = (source != null) &&
>>> !oldLocation.equals(source);
>>> {code}
>>> I also ran the tests that failed in recent 0.94 builds and they all passed:
>>>
>>>  1041  mt -Dtest=TestLruBlockCache,TestMiniClusterLoadParallel
>>>  1042  mt -Dtest=TestLruBlockCache
>>>  1043  mt -Dtest=TestCompactionState
>>>  1044  mt -Dtest=TestRSKilledWhenMasterInitializing
>>>
>>> I would also loop the above tests to see if I can get test failure.
>>>
>>> I understand it is important to have a green 0.94 build. So whether / what
>>> to roll back is up to you.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:03 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.94/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Prime suspects are: HBASE-7599 (Devaraj), and HBASE-7638 (Sergey).
>>>> If anybody has any ideas.
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise I'll start with reverting these changes.
>>>>
>>>> -- Lars
>>>>
>>>
>>>
+
lars hofhansl 2013-01-26, 06:21