Oh, Steve, maybe you've touched off an arms race here ;).

Heck with hack-a-thon an LR, let's all come with a suitcase full of
parts and build machines!

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Michael McCandless
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Wow this is a delightful machine: I am jealous!
>
> Do you have any sense of whether the higher IOPs/throughput of NVMe
> SSDs vs "mere" SATA III matters for time to run Lucene's/Solr's tests?
>
> Also, how did you parallelize the running of the tests?  Just the
> normal top-level "ant test"?  Or one "ant test" under lucene and one
> under solr, running at once?
>
> Mike McCandless
>
> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Steve Rowe <[email protected]> wrote:
>> SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167299
>> CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117404
>> M/B: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132518
>> RAM: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231820
>>
>> The mem wasn’t listed as supported by the mobo manufacturer, and it isn’t 
>> detected at its full speed (2800MHz), so currently running at 2400 
>> (“overclocked” from detected 2100 I think).  CPU isn’t overclocked from 
>> stock 3GHz, but I got a liquid cooler, thinking I’d experiment (haven’t much 
>> yet).  Even without overclocking the fans spin faster when all the cores are 
>> busy, and it’s quite the little space heater.
>>
>> I installed Debian 8, but had to fix the installer in a couple places 
>> because it didn’t know about the new NVMe device naming scheme:
>>
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=785147
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=785149
>>
>> I also upgraded to the 4.0 Linux kernel, since Debian 8 ships with the 3.16 
>> kernel, and 3.19 contains a bunch of NVMe improvements.
>>
>> And I turned “swappiness" down to zero (thanks to Mike: 
>> <http://blog.mikemccandless.com/2011/04/just-say-no-to-swapping.html>) after 
>> seeing a bunch of test stalls while running the Lucene monster tests with 4 
>> JVMs (takes about 2 hours, but I can get it down to 90 minutes or so by 
>> splitting the two tests in Test2BSortedDocValues out into their own suites - 
>> I’ll make an issue).
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>> On May 27, 2015, at 5:08 AM, Anshum Gupta <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> 8-real-core Haswell-E with 64G DDR4 memory and a NVMe 750-series SSD.
>>>
>>> Can run *all* of the Lucene and Solr tests in 10 minutes by running 
>>> multiple ant jobs in parallel!
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Ramkumar R. Aiyengar 
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Curious.. sarowe, what's the spec?
>>>
>>> On 26 May 2015 20:41, "Anshum Gupta" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The last buch of fixes seems to have fixed this. The tests passed on a 
>>> Jenkins that had failing tests earlier.
>>> Thanks Steve Rowe for lending the super-powerful machine that runs the 
>>> entire suite in 8 min!
>>>
>>> I've seen about 20 runs on that box and also runs on Policeman Jenkins with 
>>> no issues related to this test since the last commit so I've also 
>>> back-ported this to 5x as well.
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Chris Hostetter <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> : Right, as I said, we weren't hitting this issue due to our Kerberos conf.
>>> : file. i.e. the only thing that was different on our machines as compared 
>>> to
>>> : everyone else and moving that conf file got the tests to fail for me. It
>>> : now fails fairly consistently without the patch (from SOLR-7468) and has
>>> : been looking good with the patch.
>>>
>>> that smells like the kind of thing that sould have some "assume sanity
>>> checks" built into it.
>>>
>>> Given:
>>> * the test setups a special env before running the test
>>> * the test assumes the specific env will exist
>>> * the user's machine may already have env properties set before running ant 
>>> that affect the expected special env
>>>
>>> therefore: before the test does the setup of the special env, it should
>>> sanity check that the users basic env doesn't have any properties that
>>> violate the "basic" situation.
>>>
>>> so, hypothetical example based on what little i understand the
>>> authentication stuff: if the purpose of a test is to prove that some
>>> requests work with (or w/o) kerberos authentication, then before doing any
>>> setup of a "mock" kerberos env (or before setting up a "mock" situation
>>> where no authentication is required), the test should verify that there
>>> isn't already an existing kerberos env. (or if possible: "unset" whatever
>>> env/properties define that env)
>>>
>>>
>>> trivial example of a similar situation is the script engine tests --
>>> TestBadConfigs.testBogusScriptEngine:  the purpose of the test is to
>>> ensure that a solrconfig.xml file that refers to a script engine (by
>>> name) which is not installed on the machine will produce an expeted error
>>> at Solr init.  before doing the Solr init, we have an whitebox assume that
>>> asks the JVM directly if a script engine with that name already exists)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Hoss
>>> http://www.lucidworks.com/
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Anshum Gupta
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Anshum Gupta
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to