2022-03-01 10:00 UTC, Emmanuel Charpentier: > > FWIW, on Debian testing running on core i7 + 16 GB RAM, > upgrading 9.6.beta1 to 9.6.beta3 and running ptestlong >gets me one temporary failure : > > ... src/sage/schemes/cyclic_covers/cycliccover_finite_field.py # 1 doctest > failed > > and one permanent failure : > > ... src/sage/graphs/graph.py # 1 doctest failed > > The second one seems to be numerical noise : > > ********************************************************************** > File "src/sage/graphs/graph.py", line 8586, in > sage.graphs.graph.Graph.effective_resistance > Failed example: > H.effective_resistance(1, 5, base_ring=RDF) > Expected: > 1.20000... > Got: > 1.1999999999999997 > **********************************************************************
Taken care of by Sage Trac ticket 33427: numerical noise in effective_resistance involving RDF https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/33427 where a fix already has been positively reviewed. > but I have no easy explanation for the first (temporary) one, > whose ptestlong.log record is as follows : > > ********************************************************************** > File "src/sage/schemes/cyclic_covers/cycliccover_finite_field.py", line 1139, > in > sage.schemes.cyclic_covers.cycliccover_finite_field.CyclicCover_finite_field.frobenius_polynomial > Failed example: > CyclicCover(11, PolynomialRing(GF(1129), 'x')([-1] + [0]*(5-1) + > [1])).frobenius_polynomial() # long time > Exception raised: > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "sage/misc/cachefunc.pyx", line 1943, > in sage.misc.cachefunc.CachedMethodCaller.__call__ > (build/cythonized/sage/misc/cachefunc.c:10410) > return cache[k] > KeyError: ((11,), ()) > > During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred: > ... > SystemError: calling remove_from_pari_stack() inside sig_on() > ********************************************************************** > 1 item had failures: > 1 of 60 in > sage.schemes.cyclic_covers.cycliccover_finite_field.CyclicCover_finite_field.frobenius_polynomial > > Of note : this ptestlong run, on a lightly loaded laptop freshly rebooted, > entailed a very high use of memory : it used about 18 GB of swap file > above the 16 GB of RAM. I don’t remember seeing such a high > RAM usage during ptestlong of the previous versions. Was that while testing the same file src/sage/schemes/cyclic_covers/cycliccover_finite_field.py that ended up causing a system error? Or you could have hit something similar to the issue reported at Sage Trac ticket 33363: (Too) long doctest in sage/matrix/matrix_integer_dense.pyx https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/33363 where a test could sometimes take extremely long (the ticket does not comment on the memory usage in that case). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-release+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-release/CAEcArF2ZGr%2B8XagPJAoYURrOjgsovUJnuSO2QCXAR9fSo3%2BNHw%40mail.gmail.com.
