I pushed a small cleanup to versioning in the poms.

Patrick

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Reply via email to