[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2564?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14709087#comment-14709087
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-2564:
---------------------------------------
Github user tillrohrmann commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1047#issuecomment-134145892
I think both ways (increasing the number of times we sample as well as
softening the accuracy thresholds) will improve the test stability. However, as
@ChengXiangLi pointed out, increasing the number of samplings and the sample
size, will also increase the unit test costs (even though it should be in the
range of fractions of a second). Maybe we can also combine both approaches.
Other than that, LGTM.
> Failing Test: RandomSamplerTest
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-2564
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2564
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Matthias J. Sax
> Assignee: Chengxiang Li
> Labels: test-stability
>
> {noformat}
> Tests run: 17, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 15.943 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.flink.api.java.sampling.
> testPoissonSamplerFraction(org.apache.flink.api.java.sampling.RandomSamplerTest)
> Time elapsed: 0.017 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected fraction: 0.010000, result fraction:
> 0.011300
> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
> at
> org.apache.flink.api.java.sampling.RandomSamplerTest.verifySamplerFraction(RandomSamplerTest.java:249)
> at
> org.apache.flink.api.java.sampling.RandomSamplerTest.testPoissonSamplerFraction(RandomSamplerTest.java:116)
> Results :
> Failed tests:
> Successfully installed excon-0.33.0
> RandomSamplerTest.testPoissonSamplerFraction:116->verifySamplerFraction:249
> expected fraction: 0.010000, result fraction: 0.011300
> {noformat}
> Full log: https://travis-ci.org/apache/flink/jobs/76720572
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
