[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-23779?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17030437#comment-17030437
 ] 

Hudson commented on HBASE-23779:
--------------------------------

Results for branch branch-2
        [build #2451 on 
builds.a.o|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/2451/]: 
(x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}*
----
details (if available):

(/) {color:green}+1 general checks{color}
-- For more information [see general 
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/2451//General_Nightly_Build_Report/]




(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop2 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop2) 
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/2451//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop2)/]


(x) {color:red}-1 jdk8 hadoop3 checks{color}
-- For more information [see jdk8 (hadoop3) 
report|https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase%20Nightly/job/branch-2/2451//JDK8_Nightly_Build_Report_(Hadoop3)/]


(/) {color:green}+1 source release artifact{color}
-- See build output for details.


(/) {color:green}+1 client integration test{color}


> Up the default fork count to make builds complete faster; make count relative 
> to CPU count
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-23779
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-23779
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: test
>            Reporter: Michael Stack
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 3.0.0, 2.3.0
>
>
> Tests take a long time. Our fork count running all tests are conservative -- 
> 1 (small) for first part and 5 for second part (medium and large). Rather 
> than hardcoding we should set the fork count to be relative to machine size. 
> Suggestion here is 0.75C where C is CPU count. This ups the CPU use on my box.
> Looking up at jenkins, it seems like the boxes are 24 cores... at least going 
> by my random survey. The load reported on a few seems low though this not 
> representative (looking at machine/uptime).
> More parallelism willl probably mean more test failure. Let me take a look 
> see.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to