I have absolutely no problem with the time taken for the tests.

My only issue is that they intermittently fail. Because of that, I am now 
suspicious of any results I get.

Is it really an error, or is it a timing issue or a race condition?

Suspicious tests are next to useless.

On 19 Mar 2010, at 11:46, Robert Dionne wrote:

> I see similar issues, though never with 100-ref-counter.  It looks like a 
> race condition but should be checked because the place where it's used, 
> couch_db:is_idle, depends on that value being right.
> 
> make check is much faster that make cover     
> 
> I think it's ok for tests to take a long time to run and I suspect most users 
> are used to it. It's a measure of how solid the code is. Perhaps there could 
> be two levels of testing, one that's quick and superficial and sufficient to 
> verify the build so you can run it repeatedly in reasonable time, and the 
> other for users at install time that includes long running performance tests, 
> test that run a server and so forth. At build time you'd only need to run 
> this once at the end.
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 19, 2010, at 7:13 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> 
>> Some of the test suites rely on timing delays, and these are unpredictable, 
>> resulting in non-deterministic test failures. The full tag/build/test cycle 
>> is long enough as it is - but having to start again from scratch when the 
>> last, and second, run of the test suite fails adds a significant amount of 
>> friction for me. I would like to ask that this issue is address as soon as 
>> possible. It is entirely my fault that this release has been delayed as much 
>> as it has, but my job would be made significantly easier if the test suite 
>> behaved consistently.
>> 
>> I got the error included below this morning, and when I ran it again, there 
>> was no error. I am going to ignore this for now, and just call a vote on the 
>> release. But doing so is risky. I have no idea why this failed once, and as 
>> release manager, it is my duty to understand the bugs we're shipping with. I 
>> don't like being in a position where I am ignoring them for convenience. 
>> They exist as warning beacons, primarily for me, and when I start having to 
>> ignore them, they have utterly failed to do their job properly.
>> 
>> Apologies if this email sounds frustrated. I am frustrated.
>> 
>> I'm not finger pointing, just trying to illustrate the reasons for my belief 
>> that this problem should be addressed as soon as possible.
>> 
>> ./test/etap/run
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/001-load........................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/002-icu-driver..................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/010-file-basics.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/011-file-headers................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/020-btree-basics................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/021-btree-reductions............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/030-doc-from-json...............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/031-doc-to-json.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/040-util........................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/041-uuid-gen....................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/050-stream......................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/060-kt-merging..................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/061-kt-missing-leaves...........ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/062-kt-remove-leaves............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/063-kt-get-leaves...............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/064-kt-counting.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/065-kt-stemming.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/070-couch-db....................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/080-config-get-set..............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/081-config-override.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/082-config-register.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/083-config-no-files.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/090-task-status.................ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/100-ref-counter.................FAILED test 8  
>>      Failed 1/8 tests, 87.50% okay
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/110-replication-httpc...........ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/111-replication-changes-feed....ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/112-replication-missing-revs....ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/120-stats-collect...............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/121-stats-aggregates............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/130-attachments-md5.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/140-attachment-comp.............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/150-invalid-view-seq............ok             
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/160-vhosts......................ok             
>> Failed Test                               Stat Wstat Total Fail  List of 
>> Failed
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> /tmp/couchdb/0.11.0/test/etap/100-ref-cou                8    1  8
>> Failed 1/33 test scripts. 1/456 subtests failed.
>> Files=33, Tests=456, 74 wallclock secs (44.01 cusr +  4.38 csys = 48.39 CPU)
>> Failed 1/33 test programs. 1/456 subtests failed.
>> make: *** [check] Error 255
>> 
> 

Reply via email to