+1

Does anyone have suggestions about how to efficiently identify which commit
is breaking a test? Is it just git-bisect or is there an easier way? Hive
QA isn't always that helpful, it will say a test is failing for the past
"x" builds, but that doesn't help much since Hive QA isn't a nightly build.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Vihang Karajgaonkar <vih...@cloudera.com>
wrote:

> +1
> Commenting on JIRA and giving a 24hr heads-up (excluding weekends) would be
> good.
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Alan Gates <alanfga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1.
> >
> > Alan.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 8:25 AM, Thejas Nair <thejas.n...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > > I agree, this makes sense. The number of failures keeps increasing.
> > > A 24 hour heads up in either case before revert would be good.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 2:45 AM, Peter Vary <pv...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree with Zoltan. The continuously braking tests make it very hard
> > to
> > > > spot real issues.
> > > > Any thoughts on doing it automatically?
> > > >
> > > > > On Feb 22, 2018, at 10:47 AM, Zoltan Haindrich <k...@rxd.hu>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > > In the last couple weeks the number of broken tests have started to
> > go
> > > > up...and even tho I run bisect/etc from time to time ; sometimes
> people
> > > > don’t react to my comments/tickets/etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > Because keeping this many failing tests makes it easier for a new
> one
> > > to
> > > > slip in...I think reverting the patch introducing the test failures
> > would
> > > > also help in some case.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it would help a lot to prevent further test breaks to
> revert
> > > the
> > > > patch if any of the following conditions is met:
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > C1) if the notification/comment about the fact that the patch
> indeed
> > > > broken a test somehow have been unanswered for at least 24 hours.
> > > > >
> > > > > C2) if the patch is in for 7 days; but the test failure is still
> not
> > > > addressed (note that in this case there might be a conversation about
> > > > fixing it...but in this case ; to enable other people to work in a
> > > cleaner
> > > > environment is more important than a single patch - and if it can't
> be
> > > > fixed in 7 days...well it might not get fixed in a month).
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to also note that I've seen a few tickets which have
> > been
> > > > picked up by people who were not involved in creating the original
> > > change -
> > > > and although the intention was good, they might miss the context of
> the
> > > > original patch and may "fix" the tests in the wrong way: accept a
> q.out
> > > > which is inappropriate or ignore the test...
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > would it be ok to implement this from now on? because it makes my
> > > > efforts practically useless if people are not reacting…
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > note: just to be on the same page - this is only about running a
> > single
> > > > test which falls on its own - I feel that flaky tests are an entirely
> > > > different topic.
> > > > >
> > > > > *
> > > > > *
> > > > >
> > > > > cheers,
> > > > >
> > > > > Zoltan
> > > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > > *
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Sahil Takiar
Software Engineer
takiar.sa...@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309

Reply via email to