[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18707?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17769423#comment-17769423
]
Berenguer Blasi edited comment on CASSANDRA-18707 at 9/27/23 5:35 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So iiuc we're basically saying the same:
bq. I don't see a reason to do it on 4.0.
Let's do it in 4.0 +1000 imo. We don't want to be repeating this analysis in
the future. As the failure is related to jenkins it may affect any branch and
test anytime.
bq. I have no clue what Jenkins is doing
Agreed
bq. I can reproduce only the other failure from CASSANDRA-18851
Agreed
bq. make configurable the timeout as suggested
Agreed and was pushed to the PR
bq. but not raise it until we see the failure again. WDYT?
I strongly disagree here. We don't want to do this analysis again or worse,
have sbdy else do it again from scratch, specially when it can hit any random
test. It would be wasting the effort put here imo.
was (Author: bereng):
So iiuc we're basically saying the same:
bq. I don't see a reason to do it on 4.0.
Let's do it in 4.0 +1000 imo. We don't want to be repeating this analysis in
the future. As the failure is related to jenkins it may affect any branch and
test anytime.
bq. I have no clue what Jenkins is doing
Agreed
bq. I can reproduce only the other failure from CASSANDRA-18851
Agreed
bq. make configurable the timeout as suggested
Agreed and was pushed to the PR
bq. but not raise it until we see the failure again. WDYT?
I strongly disagree here. We don't want to do this analysis again or worse,
have sbdy else do it again from scratch, specially when it can hit any random
test.
> Test failure:
> junit.framework.TestSuite.org.apache.cassandra.distributed.test.CASMultiDCTest-.jdk11
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-18707
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18707
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Test/dtest/java
> Reporter: Ekaterina Dimitrova
> Assignee: Berenguer Blasi
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 4.0.x, 4.1.x, 5.0.x, 5.x
>
> Attachments: TESTS-TestSuites.xml.xz
>
>
> Seen here:
> [https://ci-cassandra.apache.org/job/Cassandra-trunk/1650/testReport/junit.framework/TestSuite/org_apache_cassandra_distributed_test_CASMultiDCTest__jdk11/]
> h3.
> {code:java}
> Error Message
> Schema agreement not reached. Schema versions of the instances:
> [ef1c8e05-a06d-388d-a46d-53cc22a94762, 6c386108-1805-3985-b48e-8016012a0207,
> 6c386108-1805-3985-b48e-8016012a0207, ef1c8e05-a06d-388d-a46d-53cc22a94762]
> Stacktrace
> java.lang.IllegalStateException: Schema agreement not reached. Schema
> versions of the instances: [ef1c8e05-a06d-388d-a46d-53cc22a94762,
> 6c386108-1805-3985-b48e-8016012a0207, 6c386108-1805-3985-b48e-8016012a0207,
> ef1c8e05-a06d-388d-a46d-53cc22a94762] at
> org.apache.cassandra.distributed.impl.AbstractCluster$ChangeMonitor.waitForCompletion(AbstractCluster.java:907)
> at
> org.apache.cassandra.distributed.impl.AbstractCluster.lambda$schemaChange$8(AbstractCluster.java:836)
> at org.apache.cassandra.concurrent.FutureTask$1.call(FutureTask.java:96) at
> org.apache.cassandra.concurrent.FutureTask.call(FutureTask.java:61) at
> org.apache.cassandra.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:71) at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1128)
> at
> java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:628)
> at
> io.netty.util.concurrent.FastThreadLocalRunnable.run(FastThreadLocalRunnable.java:30)
> at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:829)
> {code}
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
