https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YETUS-334

2016-03-15 21:48 GMT+08:00 Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com>:

> No, that definitely looks like a bug. Could you please open an issue on the
> YETUS jira with a link to the relevant builds and HBASE jiras?
>
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Phil Yang <ud1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Recently pre-commit builds seems run some commands twice.  For example,
> in
> > console of
> https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/975/console
> > or https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/978/console , we
> > run
> > "Patch findbugs detection", "Patch javadoc verification", "Running unit
> > tests" twice for each task. HadoopQA also comment repeated results with
> > different runtime in JIRA.
> >
> > We will run tests of hbase-server for four times, twice on jdk7 and twice
> > on jdk8, it will be very slow...
> >
> > Is it as expected? Thanks.
> >
> >
> > 2016-03-15 4:39 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>:
> >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15462
> > >
> > > Thanks Sean.
> > >
> > > Looks like a version parse error?
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > HBASE please, I'll refile to INFRA or wherever if I can figure out
> the
> > > > source.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > is there a jira I can track for the docker failures?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > No. All recent hadoopqas fail. Want an INFRA or HBASE issue?
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for making the job configuration all nice and tidy BTW
> > Sean.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I unchecked RUN_IN_DOCKER just now to try and get us over
> current
> > > > bout
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > docker build failures.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > St.Ack
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > bus...@cloudera.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > FYI, I've just updated our precommit jobs to use the 0.2.0
> > > release
> > > > of
> > > > > > > Yetus
> > > > > > > > that came out today.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > After keeping an eye out for strangeness today I'll turn
> docker
> > > > mode
> > > > > > back
> > > > > > > > on by default tonight.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > bus...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > FYI, I added a new parameter to the precommit job:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > * USE_YETUS_PRERELEASE - causes us to use the HEAD of the
> > > > > > apache/yetus
> > > > > > > > > repo rather than our chosen release
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It defaults to inactive, but can be used in
> > manually-triggered
> > > > runs
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > test a solution to a problem in the yetus library. At the
> > > moment,
> > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > > > using it to test a solution to default module ordering  as
> > seen
> > > > in
> > > > > > > > > HBASE-15075.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Sean Busbey <
> > > bus...@cloudera.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > FYI, I just pushed HBASE-13525 (switch to Apache Yetus
> for
> > > > > > precommit
> > > > > > > > > tests)
> > > > > > > > > > and updated our jenkins precommit build to use it.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Jenkins job has some explanation:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/PreCommit%20Builds/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Release note from HBASE-13525 does as well.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The old job will stick around here for a couple of weeks,
> > in
> > > > case
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > need
> > > > > > > > > > to refer back to it:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/PreCommit%20Builds/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build-deprecated/
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If something looks awry, please drop a note on
> HBASE-13525
> > > > while
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > remains
> > > > > > > > > > open (and make a new issue after).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >> As part of my continuing advocacy of builds.apache.org
> > and
> > > > that
> > > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > > >> results are now worthy of our trust and nurture, here
> are
> > > some
> > > > > > > > > highlights
> > > > > > > > > >> from the last few days of builds:
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> + hadoopqa is now finding zombies before the patch is
> > > > committed.
> > > > > > > > > >> HBASE-14888 showed "-1 core tests. The patch failed
> these
> > > unit
> > > > > > > tests:"
> > > > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > > > >> didn't have any failed tests listed (I'm trying to see
> if
> > I
> > > > can
> > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > anything
> > > > > > > > > >> about this...). Running our little
> > > > > ./dev-tools/findHangingTests.py
> > > > > > > > > against
> > > > > > > > > >> the consoleText, it showed a hanging test. Running
> > locally,
> > > I
> > > > > see
> > > > > > > same
> > > > > > > > > >> hang. This is before the patch landed.
> > > > > > > > > >> + Our branch runs are now near totally zombie and flakey
> > > free
> > > > --
> > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > > >> work to do -- but a recent patch that seemed harmless
> was
> > > > > causing
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > >> reliable flake fail in the backport to branch-1*
> confirmed
> > > by
> > > > > > local
> > > > > > > > > runs.
> > > > > > > > > >> The flakeyness was plain to see up in builds.apache.org
> .
> > > > > > > > > >> + In the last few days I've committed a patch that
> > included
> > > > > > javadoc
> > > > > > > > > >> warnings even though hadoopqa said the patch introduced
> > > > javadoc
> > > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > > (I
> > > > > > > > > >> missed it). This messed up life for folks subsequently
> as
> > > > their
> > > > > > > > patches
> > > > > > > > > now
> > > > > > > > > >> reported javadoc issues....
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> In short, I suggest that builds.apache.org is worth
> > keeping
> > > > an
> > > > > > eye
> > > > > > > > on,
> > > > > > > > > >> make
> > > > > > > > > >> sure you get a clean build out of hadoopqa before
> > committing
> > > > > > > anything,
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > >> lets all work together to try and keep our builds blue:
> > > it'll
> > > > > save
> > > > > > > us
> > > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > >> work in the long run.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> St.Ack
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Stack <st...@duboce.net
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Branch-1 and master have stabilized and now run mostly
> > > blue
> > > > > > (give
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > take
> > > > > > > > > >> > the odd failure) [1][2]. Having a mostly blue branch-1
> > has
> > > > > > helped
> > > > > > > us
> > > > > > > > > >> > identify at least one destabilizing commit in the last
> > few
> > > > > days,
> > > > > > > > maybe
> > > > > > > > > >> two;
> > > > > > > > > >> > this is as it should be (smile).
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Lets keep our builds blue. If you commit a patch, make
> > > sure
> > > > > > > > subsequent
> > > > > > > > > >> > builds stay blue. You can subscribe to
> > > > > bui...@hbase.apache.org
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > get
> > > > > > > > > >> > notice of failures if not already subscribed.
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > >> > St.Ack
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > 1.
> > > > > https://builds.apache.org/view/H-L/view/HBase/job/HBase-1.0/
> > > > > > > > > >> > 2.
> > > > > > https://builds.apache.org/view/H-L/view/HBase/job/HBase-TRUNK/
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Stack <
> > st...@duboce.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> >> A few notes on testing.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> Too long to read, infra is more capable now and after
> > > some
> > > > > > work,
> > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > >> >> seeing branch-1 and trunk mostly running blue. Lets
> try
> > > and
> > > > > > keep
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > >> >> way going forward.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> Apache Infra has new, more capable hardware.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> A recent spurt of test fixing combined with more
> > capable
> > > > > > hardware
> > > > > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > > > >> >> to have gotten us to a new place; tests are mostly
> > > passing
> > > > > now
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > >> branch-1
> > > > > > > > > >> >> and master.  Lets try and keep it this way and start
> to
> > > > trust
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > > test
> > > > > > > > > >> runs
> > > > > > > > > >> >> again.  Just a few flakies remain.  Lets try and nail
> > > them.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> Our tests now run in parallel with other test suites
> > > where
> > > > > > > previous
> > > > > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > >> >> ran alone. You can see this sometimes when our zombie
> > > > > detector
> > > > > > > > > reports
> > > > > > > > > >> >> tests from another project altogether as lingerers
> (To
> > be
> > > > > > fixed).
> > > > > > > > > Some
> > > > > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > > > > >> >> our tests are failing because a concurrent hbase run
> is
> > > > > undoing
> > > > > > > > > classes
> > > > > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > > > > >> >> data from under it. Also, lets fix.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> Our tests are brittle. It takes 75minutes for them to
> > > > > complete.
> > > > > > > > Many
> > > > > > > > > >> are
> > > > > > > > > >> >> heavy-duty integration tests starting up multiple
> > > clusters
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > mapreduce
> > > > > > > > > >> >> all in the one JVM. It is a miracle they pass at all.
> > > > > Usually
> > > > > > > > > >> integration
> > > > > > > > > >> >> tests have been cast as unit tests because there was
> no
> > > > where
> > > > > > > else
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > >> them
> > > > > > > > > >> >> to get an airing.  We have the hbase-it suite now
> which
> > > > would
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > > > >> apt
> > > > > > > > > >> >> place but until these are run on a regular basis in
> > > public
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > >> see,
> > > > > > > > > >> >> the fat integration tests disguised as unit tests
> will
> > > > > > remain.  A
> > > > > > > > > >> review of
> > > > > > > > > >> >> our current unit tests weeding the old cruft and the
> no
> > > > > longer
> > > > > > > > > relevant
> > > > > > > > > >> or
> > > > > > > > > >> >> duplicates would be a nice undertaking if someone is
> > > > looking
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > >> contribute.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> Alex Newman has been working on making our tests work
> > up
> > > on
> > > > > > > travis
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > >> >> circle-ci.  That'll be sweet when it goes end-to-end.
> > He
> > > > > also
> > > > > > > > added
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > >> >> some "type" categorizations -- client, filter,
> > mapreduce
> > > --
> > > > > > > > alongside
> > > > > > > > > >> our
> > > > > > > > > >> >> old "sizing" categorizations of small/medium/large.
> > His
> > > > > > thinking
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > > > > >> >> we can run these categorizations in parallel so we
> > could
> > > > run
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > total
> > > > > > > > > >> >> suite in about the time of the longest test, say
> > > > > 20-30minutes?
> > > > > > > We
> > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > >> >> even change Apache to run them this way.
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >> FYI,
> > > > > > > > > >> >> St.Ack
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Sean
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > busbey
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > busbey
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > busbey
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Phil Yang
> >
>
>
>
> --
> busbey
>



-- 
Thanks,
Phil Yang

Reply via email to