Looks like the 1 second session timeout may be at fault. I'm delving into it and will open a jira.
Patrick On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Camille Fournier <[email protected]> wrote: > That is not good... Don't suppose you could debug it a bit, or send logs at > least. > > C > > From my phone > On Oct 27, 2011 8:01 PM, "Patrick Hunt" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> My first run on 3.4 branch resulted in: >> >> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Should have same number of >> ephemerals in both followers expected:<11741> but was:<14001> >> at >> org.apache.zookeeper.test.FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.verifyState(FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.java:400) >> at >> org.apache.zookeeper.test.FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.testResyncBySnapThenDiffAfterFollowerCrashes(FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.java:196) >> at >> org.apache.zookeeper.JUnit4ZKTestRunner$LoggedInvokeMethod.evaluate(JUnit4ZKTestRunner.java:52) >> >> Patrick >> >> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >> > In my CI environment I have some lower powered (virt) hardware, >> > therein I see this test failing frequently: >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-962 >> > junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Should have same number of >> > ephemerals in both followers expected:<11241> but was:<14001> >> > at >> org.apache.zookeeper.test.FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.verifyState(FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.java:381) >> > at >> org.apache.zookeeper.test.FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.testResyncBySnapThenDiffAfterFollowerCrashes(FollowerResyncConcurrencyTest.java:186) >> > at >> org.apache.zookeeper.JUnit4ZKTestRunner$LoggedInvokeMethod.evaluate(JUnit4ZKTestRunner.java:52) >> > >> > In this test I see all kinds of Thread.sleep calls which makes me >> > suspect that it might be the tests failing due to slow h/w. However >> > while trunk is failing branch 3.3 has not seen this issue. I'm not >> > running testing on branch 3.4 (I'm starting now). >> > >> > I don't see this on apache ZK trunk testing. >> > >> > >> > Thoughts? Could this be false positives from the test, or something >> > more serious? >> > >> > Patrick >> > >> >
