Thank you! Just kicked off the build. Let's see what it tells us :) On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Wyatt Barnett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Liamonas -- you should be all set, I just added > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewType.html?buildTypeId=LuceneNet_LuceneNetCoreFailingTests > which runs the core build with focused tests. Please ignore the build > number. Test category is more of a general setting for a build so there > isn't an easy checkbox to hit. > > If it makes more sense to re-point that at your github repo just say the > word and I'll make it so. > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 8:10 PM Laimonas Simutis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Wyatt, > > > > I have a branch pushed for this named "failingtests", it is now running a > > build on TC. Where does one specify which category of tests to run? I see > > in the settings tab "NUnit categories include/exclude" but don't see > where > > to actually modify these values. The tests I would like to run belong to > > category "Focus" :) Do you know where to change this? > > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Wyatt Barnett <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > > > Good to hear I checked the right box. > > > > > > I'll see what I can pull together when I get home in terms of debug > > output. > > > In terms of testing procedure what I was thinking is we make a new > > category > > > -- call it "Focus" and then configure a build looking at your fork > > > filtering for just those tests. You can then push away, fire off remote > > > builds and check the output yourself. > > > > > > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:50 PM Laimonas Simutis <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Wyatt, > > > > > > > > I see the new options on TC, thanks for that. I still haven't thought > > > about > > > > how I will go about capturing the failures exactly, but will give > you a > > > > shout if I need some help with TC configuration just for those runs. > > > > > > > > If you can reproduce any of those test failures locally, do you mind > > > > running them in VERBOSE mode (debug build without any other changes > > will > > > > do), and emailing the console output that you get? I might be too > > > > optimistic, but perhaps something there will stand out. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks again! > > > > > > > > Laimis > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Wyatt Barnett < > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > For TestSort_2 -- It appears to be passing based on data at > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/project.html?projectId=LuceneNet&testNameId=-8365680837810961892&tab=testDetails > > > > > ; I am having locally reproducable problems on the others though. > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Wyatt Barnett < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Done -- you should now see a run button when you visit > > > > > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/project.html?projectId=LuceneNet > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Laimonas Simutis < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Wyatt, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Could you add me to the lucene.net group on TC? I have a login > > > there, > > > > > >> username: laimis. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Thanks! > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Wyatt Barnett < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Sounds good Laimis. You will need to setup a login to the > > > CodeBetter > > > > > >> > teamcity server and get added to the lucene.net group if you > > > > haven't > > > > > >> > already. Let me know if you need help there too. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 4:52 PM Laimonas Simutis < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Wyatt, > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Sweet, I will let you know once I have a branch out with > > > > additional > > > > > >> > logging > > > > > >> > > and separate category for tests that you can configure to > run. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Re: release mode, tried that and was able to fix a few bugs > > > after > > > > > >> > switching > > > > > >> > > to it. They were in that PR with debug.assert changes. Who > > > knows, > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > remaining failures might still be related to that, but can't > > > > > >> reproduce it > > > > > >> > > locally. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Laimis > > > > > >> > > On May 16, 2015 4:34 PM, "Wyatt Barnett" < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Sorry about the blank one -- getting used to google inbox > > here > > > > > and I > > > > > >> > > > misclicked. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > Anyhow, I have a repro or at least a rhyme and reason -- > > > > TeamCity > > > > > is > > > > > >> > > > running in release mode and I think we have difffering > > > behavior > > > > > >> there. > > > > > >> > If > > > > > >> > > > you switch your copy of visual studio to release mode you > > will > > > > get > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > > same > > > > > >> > > > failures we are seeing in TeamCity. Does that help narrow > it > > > > down > > > > > a > > > > > >> > bit? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 4:26 PM Wyatt Barnett < > > > > > >> [email protected] > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM Wyatt Barnett < > > > > > >> > [email protected] > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> I agree with Itamar -- it feels environmental. I'll do > > some > > > > > >> digging > > > > > >> > > into > > > > > >> > > > >> the teamcity output but I think the plan of setting up > > some > > > > > extra > > > > > >> > > > verbose > > > > > >> > > > >> logging here would make sense. I can set you up with a > > > > separate > > > > > >> > build > > > > > >> > > > >> pointed at your fork if that helps -- it will keep the > > > > feedback > > > > > >> > cycle > > > > > >> > > > >> tighter. The other thing we could do is categorize the > > > tests > > > > > and > > > > > >> > focus > > > > > >> > > > that > > > > > >> > > > >> build at running only that category so you don't need > to > > > wait > > > > > on > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > > > whole > > > > > >> > > > >> suite to get responses. Let me know if you want me to > > > proceed > > > > > >> there. > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko < > > > > > >> > > [email protected] > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >>> Yes, that would be the best way to do this. On Java > > > Lucene, > > > > > the > > > > > >> > > > >>> randomized > > > > > >> > > > >>> tests framework allows you to re-use the random seed > > > > > associated > > > > > >> > with > > > > > >> > > > the > > > > > >> > > > >>> failure, but we are not there yet. Either way, I > suspect > > > > this > > > > > >> to be > > > > > >> > > an > > > > > >> > > > >>> environment issue rather than a code path one. > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > >>> -- > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > >>> Itamar Syn-Hershko > > > > > >> > > > >>> http://code972.com | @synhershko < > > > > > >> https://twitter.com/synhershko> > > > > > >> > > > >>> Freelance Developer & Consultant > > > > > >> > > > >>> Lucene.NET committer and PMC member > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > >>> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Laimonas Simutis < > > > > > >> > [email protected] > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >>> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > >>> > There are three tests that consistently fail on TC > but > > > no > > > > > >> matter > > > > > >> > > how > > > > > >> > > > >>> many > > > > > >> > > > >>> > times I try, I can't reproduce it locally. These > tests > > > > are: > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > TestFuzzyQuery.TestTieBreaker > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewLog.html?buildId=191298&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=LuceneNet_Core#testNameId-6371662534320583798 > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > TestSimpleExplanations.TestDMQ8 > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewLog.html?buildId=191298&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=LuceneNet_Core#testNameId5725706748293106127 > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > TestTopDocsMerge.TestSort_2 > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewLog.html?buildId=191298&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=LuceneNet_Core#testNameId-8365680837810961892 > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > I would fix them if I could reproduce it -- and I am > > > > running > > > > > >> out > > > > > >> > of > > > > > >> > > > >>> ideas > > > > > >> > > > >>> > how to do it. Even if I put them in a loop running > > > > hundreds > > > > > of > > > > > >> > > > times, I > > > > > >> > > > >>> > can't trigger the failure. > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > Anyone have any ideas how to go about reproducing > it? > > I > > > am > > > > > >> > thinking > > > > > >> > > > to > > > > > >> > > > >>> push > > > > > >> > > > >>> > very verbose code in a separate branch that logs the > > > input > > > > > >> > values / > > > > > >> > > > >>> random > > > > > >> > > > >>> > values that are used and see what happens. Checking > if > > > > > anyone > > > > > >> has > > > > > >> > > any > > > > > >> > > > >>> other > > > > > >> > > > >>> > suggestions. > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > Thanks, > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > Laimis > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > > >> > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
