FYI, I updated the precommit job today to specify that only compile time checks should be done against jdks other than the primary jdk7 instance.
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> wrote: > I tested things out, and while YETUS-297[1] is present the default runs > all plugins that can do multiple jdks against those available (jdk7 and > jdk8 in our case). > > We can configure things to only do a single run of unit tests. They'll be > against jdk7, since that is our default jdk. That fine by everyone? It'll > save ~1.5 hours on any build that hits hbase-server. > > On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 1:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: > >> Hurray! >> >> It looks like YETUS-96 is in there and we are only running on jdk build >> now, the default (but testing compile against both).... Will keep an eye. >> >> 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
