Good stuff G. St.Ack
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Gary Helmling <[email protected]> wrote: > I created HBASE-4545 to clean up TestHLog. > > Among other things, it didn't even need to spin up a MiniHBaseCluster, only > a MiniDFSCluster. Several of the tests were also leaking unclosed HLog > instances. > > Will post a patch shortly. > > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Gary Helmling <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > +CC Roman who worked on the patch identified by the bisect. >>> >>> Thanks for the CC. I've just subscribed myself to the list. >>> >>> > Roman, does Gary's analysis make sense to you? >>> >>> Hm. I need to look into it. There *could* be some issues with the >>> mini-cluster, >>> since I've enabled a whole new codepath for it. >>> >>> >>> >> I'm thinking this may just be sloppiness or lack of cleanup in TestHLog >> that was just exposed by the HBASE-4209 change. Even if I revert the change >> to JVMClusterUtil from 4209 and instead use the patch to call shutdown in >> TestHLog.tearDownAfterClass(), I still get hangs every 3-4 runs when >> executing TestHLog in a loop. >> >> Previously, when TestHLog had neither the shutdown hook nor an explicit >> shutdown of the mini cluster, I'm guessing that the test would "pass" even >> though the mini cluster never fully shut down. So it's good to have the >> shutdown hooks in place for tests to help us ferret out these issues. >> >> >> >
