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

Switch to Plain View
Hive, mail # dev - Supporting an independent build farm


+
Edward Capriolo 2013-06-16, 18:02
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Supporting an independent build farm
Vinod Kumar Vavilapalli 2013-06-16, 21:31
This is from someone from Hadoop and who's  been on and off in Hive.

Dedicated test resources is good, but there are other (simpler?) things worth pursuing to begin with - suggestions from the peanut gallery:
 - Split the project into modules. Without thinking much, a simple split could be client, execution engine, metastore. We did the module split in Hadoop, it is initially a bit of pain but pays back a lot in future. And whenever there are isolated module changes, only those modules needs to be tested. Also has the added benefit of clear modularity.
 - A separate candidate suite of pre-commit tests. It can be a subset of all the tests, may be even hand-picked. Sure they won't catch some bugs, but it is a reasonable compromise that worked in Hadoop.
 - And wire the pre-commit tests with JIRA/Jenkins.

Thanks,
+Vinod

On Jun 16, 2013, at 11:02 AM, Edward Capriolo wrote:

> Hive's unit test suite has gotten larger as we have added more features and
> thus it takes longer to run. For a single machine duel core with solid
> state disks I have to start a test run at night, and then check the next
> morning to see if the run has finished. (I have been running tests for
> maybe 2 hours and am up to escape.q)
>
> ::opinion::
> Also for a long time the distribution of which features get reviewed,
> tested, and committed has been unfair. With more people involved in the
> project this situation has gotten better however it is still not fair. What
> sometimes ends up happening is that a good feature, which is reviewed, and
> +1ed sits uncommitted for months or years.
>
> Some committers or groups of commiters have an agenda and dedicated testing
> resources, and others do not. This unbalances the project. It means that
> small incremental improvements and new features not important to 'large
> company with testing resources x' sit ready to be committed while other
> people working in pairs further the project to their agenda. (This last
> statement is not a condemnation of anyone, just possibly a fact of life)
>
> ::suggestion::
> 1) The project should sponsor an open and independent build/test farm
> 2) Once a ticket is marked 'patch available' this build farm should
> automatically notice this and begin testing the patch
> 3) patches/issues which pass tests first should be considered 1st for
> inclusions
>
> We can use a hosted testing service such as:
> http://www.cloudbees.com/platform/pricing/devcloud.cb
>
> Q. Do any committers/interested parties like the idea?
> Q. Would anyone be interested in dedicating financial resources to getting
> this off the ground (I am)
>
> Q. Does anyone have ideas for a better platform or a better system

+
Brock Noland 2013-06-16, 22:22