On 1 May 2015 at 13:53, Chuck Rolke <cro...@redhat.com> wrote: > I ran the patched map fix in the original environment where the issue was > first spotted. > > * Without the fix 4 of 10 tests failed within the first minute. > * With the fix 0 of 20 tests failed within the first minute. > > This is a great candidate for 0.9.1. >
..or, given thats already under vote, maybe 0.9.2, or even the perhaps-sooner-than-expected 0.10 being sounded out on the other thread? > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gordon Sim" <g...@redhat.com> >> To: proton@qpid.apache.org >> Sent: Friday, May 1, 2015 6:02:09 AM >> Subject: Re: candidate commits for 0.9.1 >> >> On 04/29/2015 05:38 PM, Gordon Sim wrote: >> > On 04/27/2015 01:45 PM, Gordon Sim wrote: >> >> On 04/27/2015 01:14 PM, Rafael Schloming wrote: >> >>> I also added PROTON-858 as a release blocker. >> >> >> >> I've been trying to get a fix proposal together for that. I'll post it >> >> for review as soon as I'm reasonably confident, still seeing some issues >> >> at present (not 100% sure they are related, but am assuming so). >> > >> > Just to update the status here. Although I have positive reviews for the >> > simple patch, I have encountered some issues even with that during >> > stress testing. >> > >> > I can't say for sure whether these are caused by my change as the test >> > showing them up doesn't run long enough without the change. However >> > until I know for sure I am not keen to commit it. >> >> It turns out the issues are not related to the change nor are they in >> proton, but in qpid::messaging itself. I have therefore committed the >> fix now to master, and posted the optimisation suggested by Alan for >> review: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33750/ (this also passes my stress >> tests). >> >>
