[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13351?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15366982#comment-15366982
 ] 

Aaron Fabbri commented on HADOOP-13351:
---------------------------------------

Thank you for review [~liuml07]. I do not have ability to assign JIRA issues 
here.. Looking into that.

On the code, I understand what you are saying. My thinking here is that we 
should at least be getting a minimal send buffer, so let's test that.  Since 
the socket option is only a hint, I'm concerned increasing it too much could 
add another cause of test flakiness: the OS declining to set a large send 
buffer size for a socket.   So I'd personally lean towards keeping it as is in 
the patch or removing the two test cases.

> TestDFSClientSocketSize buffer size tests are flaky
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-13351
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-13351
>             Project: Hadoop Common
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 2.8.0, 3.0.0-alpha1
>            Reporter: Aaron Fabbri
>            Assignee: Aaron Fabbri
>         Attachments: HADOOP-13551.001.patch
>
>
> {{TestDFSClientSocketSize}} has two tests that assert that a value that was 
> set via {{java.net.Socket#setSendBufferSize}} is equal to the value 
> subsequently returned by {{java.net.Socket#getSendBufferSize}}.
> These tests are flaky when we run them. The occasionally fail.
> This is expected behavior, actually, because 
> {{Socket#setSendBufferSize()}}[is only a 
> hint|https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/net/Socket.html#setSendBufferSize(int)].
>   (Similar to how the underlying libc {{setsockopt(SO_SNDBUF)}} works).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org

Reply via email to