I'll work on fixing the tmp issue, that's something I can handle. ;-) Everything should be in target.
Patrick On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > Hmm, I will take a look at that one next. > > Aaron > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thanks Aaron. The other failing test "BlurClusterTest" is somehow due >> to the directory used. "./tmp/cluster". If I change to >> "file://tmp/cluster" the test passes. Any ideas? Seems somehow related >> to using relative paths? >> >> Patrick >> >> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Found it, the test did not setup the indexing options correctly. I >>> have committed a fix for the test. >>> >>> Aaron >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> After cleaning up the test, I have gotten the same NPE. Strange >>>> behavior, still working on why. >>>> >>>> Aaron >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> NP. here's the output. I'm on ubuntu 12.04. 1.6.0_26 >>>>> >>>>> "mvn clean test" results in: (I also removed the tmp directories >>>>> manually, btw, we should move this to mvn target dir) >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Test set: org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterableTest >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.005 >>>>> sec <<< FAILURE! >>>>> testTermDocIterable(org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterableTest) Time >>>>> elapsed: 0.005 sec <<< ERROR! >>>>> java.lang.NullPointerException >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterable.getNext(TermDocIterable.java:82) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterable.access$000(TermDocIterable.java:29) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterable$1.<init>(TermDocIterable.java:48) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterable.iterator(TermDocIterable.java:47) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterableTest.testTermDocIterable(TermDocIterableTest.java:65) >>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >>>>> at >>>>> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) >>>>> at >>>>> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) >>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:44) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:41) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:28) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:76) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50) >>>>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:193) >>>>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:52) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:191) >>>>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:42) >>>>> at >>>>> org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:184) >>>>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:236) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4TestSet.execute(JUnit4TestSet.java:53) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.executeTestSet(JUnit4Provider.java:123) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.junit4.JUnit4Provider.invoke(JUnit4Provider.java:104) >>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) >>>>> at >>>>> sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) >>>>> at >>>>> sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) >>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.util.ReflectionUtils.invokeMethodWithArray(ReflectionUtils.java:164) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ProviderFactory$ProviderProxy.invoke(ProviderFactory.java:110) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.SurefireStarter.invokeProvider(SurefireStarter.java:175) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.SurefireStarter.runSuitesInProcessWhenForked(SurefireStarter.java:107) >>>>> at >>>>> org.apache.maven.surefire.booter.ForkedBooter.main(ForkedBooter.java:68) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Sorry, just missed that message. Hmm, I will look around and try to >>>>>> see if I can find something. Thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> Aaron >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> this is null in termdocsitertest >>>>>>> >>>>>>> DocsEnum termDocs = atomicReader.termDocsEnum(new Term("id", >>>>>>> Integer.toString(id))); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> due to fields() being null in termDocsEnum method >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't see why yet though. Given the segment file exists on the >>>>>>> filesystem, etc... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Trying to reproduce on Ubuntu. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hm, I just updated and I'm seeing two errors (which is 1 less issue >>>>>>>>> than before): >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> testTermDocIterable(org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterableTest) >>>>>>>>> org.apache.blur.thrift.BlurClusterTest: >>>>>>>>> java.lang.NullPointerException >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Let me look and see if I can at least determine what the underlying >>>>>>>>> problems are. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> I ran into some errors with ZookeeperClusterStatusTest tests and have >>>>>>>>>> resolved the issues I found. All units tests pass on OSX, I have not >>>>>>>>>> had a chance to run them on Linux yet. I also fixed the nasty NPE >>>>>>>>>> exception on the BlurClusterTest (it was affecting the functional >>>>>>>>>> tests as well). I ran a few burn-in tests on a VM running a 2 >>>>>>>>>> controller + 3 shard server Blur cluster. The tests included loaded >>>>>>>>>> data as fast as possibly while running searches against that data as >>>>>>>>>> fast as possible. The tests ran without issue (basically like they >>>>>>>>>> did before the upgrade to Lucene 4). I feel like the code is in a >>>>>>>>>> good state at this point. I'm going to merge this code to master and >>>>>>>>>> create another branch to begin modifying the RPC API. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Anyone have any objections? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Aaron >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Hmm. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure if anyone else is seeing this but the unit tests are not >>>>>>>>>>>>> passing for me on ubuntu. I see one failure and two errors. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Failed tests: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> testSafeModeSetInFuture(org.apache.blur.manager.clusterstatus.ZookeeperClusterStatusTest) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Haven't seen this. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Tests in error: >>>>>>>>>>>>> testTermDocIterable(org.apache.blur.utils.TermDocIterableTest) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This either. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.blur.thrift.BlurClusterTest: >>>>>>>>>>>>> java.lang.NullPointerException >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think I have been seeing this one during some functional tests. >>>>>>>>>>>> Haven't figured out the cause yet, but it seems like it's a nasty >>>>>>>>>>>> threading problem. Because when I drop the mutate threads back 1 >>>>>>>>>>>> everything works fine. However the test was passing on OSX. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just me or is this expected? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Not expected. I'm going to setup a VM on computer to run tests in >>>>>>>>>>>> Linux as well. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ok. Let me know how it goes and I can try and debug it a bit, >>>>>>>>>>> although >>>>>>>>>>> you're running much faster than I can at this point. ;-) Definitely >>>>>>>>>>> let me know if you can't reproduce it and I'll dig into it for sure. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Aaron McCurry >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can fix the jira issues. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Garrett Barton >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds good to me Aaron, call it 0.2. Does that mess up Jira if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> things scheduled against releases? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2012 9:44 AM, "Aaron McCurry" <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, I think it will be some time before all the changes for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> api are in place and fully functional. So perhaps we should >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merge the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lucene-4.0.0 branch into master and fix whatever bugs are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> found. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did some system testing yesterday and only found one big >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issue. There >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to be a threading problem with the BlurAnalyzer. If a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instance is in use across multiple threads some weird behaviors >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happen. Otherwise everything else seems to work, normally (I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create a jira issue). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we do merge the lucene-4.0.0 branch, I feel like we should >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the version to 0.2. The reason is, the indexes in 0.1.x are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be backwards compatible (at least not with out some work). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyone have any strong feelings on this? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aaron >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Gagan Juneja >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > I agree with Garrett. We can merge this branch to the place >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > from where we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > cut it. Again as Garrett said If we want to keep only new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > api thing then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > can merge it to master as well. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Gagan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Garrett Barton < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> I guess it depends on if your planning a 1.4 release with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> lucene 4. If >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> then merge and work towards making everything functional. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> If not then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> leave >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the 1.3.x in master for bug fixing or whatnot and merge >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> this branch into >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> the new api one. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On Oct 20, 2012 11:03 AM, "Aaron McCurry" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > I think that we can merge the lucene-4.0.0 branch back >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > into the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > master, since tests and code are compiling. I haven't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > done any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > functional testing yet, but if much of the RPC and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > internals are going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > to change I think that it may be a waste of time to test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > and fix >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > everything that we are about to change. What do others >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > think? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > Aaron >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
