>From the Sonar page today: (August 10, 2011):
https://analysis.apache.org/drilldown/measures/63921?metric=test_failures&rids[]=63933#
129993 ms testLanczosSolver
Lanczos taking too long! Are you in the debugger? :)
java.lang.AssertionError: Lanczos taking too long! Are you in the debugger? :)
at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:91)
at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:43)
at
org.apache.mahout.math.decomposer.lanczos.TestLanczosSolver.testLanczosSolver(TestLanczosSolver.java:76)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]> wrote:
> Will do.
>
> On Aug 8, 2011, at 1:08 PM, Sean Owen wrote:
>
>> <forkMode>always</forkMode> works for me. I think that it's also good to run
>> with <parallel>classes<parallel> so that it only spawns a JVM per class. Try
>> that?
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> I'll have to run again, but perhaps it was just my machine. Try the config
>>> below if you get a chance and see if you get failures. I too was wondering
>>> about the forkMode as the culprit, but didn't have time to test it just yet.
>>>
>>> -Grant
>>>
>>> On Aug 8, 2011, at 3:01 AM, Sean Owen wrote:
>>>
>>>> What failures do you see?
>>>> The tests ought to be isolated as they (should) reserve unique temp
>>>> directories in which to work.
>>>> Does forkMode = once mean there's one JVM? That could be the problem, due
>>> to
>>>> RNG differences. It really needs a JVM per thread.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Grant Ingersoll <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Granted, I'm on a slow machine, but our tests take forever to run. On
>>> an 2
>>>>> core MBP, it takes well over an hour to run all the tests (I did just
>>> order
>>>>> a new MBP, so it will be faster, but it doesn't lend itself to a good
>>> OOTB
>>>>> experience for people)
>>>>>
>>>>> One idea would be to add in parallel test execution in Maven. I think
>>> this
>>>>> requires Mvn 3, but I am not sure. Another is to take a look at our
>>> tests,
>>>>> especially the slow ones and see if we can speed them up.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I try adding in parallel tests to Maven, I get a bunch of failures
>>> in
>>>>> the tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was using:
>>>>> <plugin>
>>>>> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
>>>>> <artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId>
>>>>> <configuration>
>>>>> <forkMode>once</forkMode>
>>>>> <argLine>-Xms256m -Xmx512m</argLine>
>>>>> <testFailureIgnore>false</testFailureIgnore>
>>>>> <redirectTestOutputToFile>true</redirectTestOutputToFile>
>>>>> <parallel>classes</parallel>
>>>>> <threadCount>5</threadCount>
>>>>> </configuration>
>>>>> </plugin>
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone played around with this stuff? I suspect the failures are due to
>>>>> tests stomping on each other, but I am still digging in.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Grant
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>> Grant Ingersoll
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> --------------------------
> Grant Ingersoll
>
>
>
>
--
Lance Norskog
[email protected]
