[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Changes by STINNER Victor victor.stin...@gmail.com: -- components: +Asyncio nosy: +gvanrossum, yselivanov ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Stefan Krah added the comment: Let's open a new issue for system load detection. This one is not asyncio specific. -- resolution: - not a bug stage: needs patch - status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
STINNER Victor added the comment: Let's open a new issue for system load detection. This one is not asyncio specific. I opened issues #20910 and #20964 for example. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Stefan Krah added the comment: I'm seeing other unrelated timeouts on the OpenIndiana machines. Jesús, are the machines perhaps operating under an unusually high load? -- nosy: +jcea ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
STINNER Victor added the comment: I'm seeing other unrelated timeouts on the OpenIndiana machines. I read somewhere that the host of these virtual machines is *highly* loaded (load 6). It's more a buildbot configuration issue than a test_asyncio issue. -- nosy: +haypo ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Stefan Krah added the comment: I see. That's astonishing, because usually the builds are ultra-fast on those machines. -- nosy: -gvanrossum ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
STINNER Victor added the comment: Tests failing because of timings is really annoying. It would be nice to add something in test.support to configure timings. A function can maybe wait until the system load is lower than a threshold, or we should add a parameter to configure a tolerance between the perfect timing and the expected timing. The tolerance can be a simple factor, a floating point number = 1.0. For example, replace: 0.09 = t1-t0 = 0.9, t1-t0 with 0.1 - 0.01 * factor = t1-t0 = 0.1 + 0.8 * factor or a new test function: check_timing(t1-t0, 0.1, 0.01, 0.8) -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Stefan Krah added the comment: +1 for doing something about timing failures. Perhaps also a decorator @skip_if_load_higher_than(x). [Nick, I'm adding you because our current test suite could lead to commit impossible situations with Zuul.] -- nosy: +ncoghlan ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I have a draft PEP for the Zuul idea, and yes, it notes the increased consequences of declaring a buildbot stable when it sometimes isn't. There's a reason OpenStack treats third party test results as advisory only rather than as gating criteria :P -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
New submission from Stefan Krah: It seems that the relaxed timings in some tests are still not sufficient: http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/AMD64%20OpenIndiana%203.x/builds/7417/steps/test/logs/stdio == FAIL: test_time_and_call_at (test.test_asyncio.test_base_events.BaseEventLoopTests) -- Traceback (most recent call last): File /export/home/buildbot/64bits/3.x.cea-indiana-amd64/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_base_events.py, line 127, in test_time_and_call_at self.assertTrue(0.09 = t1-t0 = 0.9, t1-t0) AssertionError: False is not true : 2.06036564335227 -- components: Tests keywords: buildbot messages: 208714 nosy: gvanrossum, skrah priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: test_asyncio: relax timings even more type: behavior versions: Python 3.4 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue20336] test_asyncio: relax timings even more
Guido van Rossum added the comment: I won't have time to fix this (and bardly to even review a fix) but this seems a straightforward fix and you can go ahead without me -- maybe you can get someone else with some asyncio experience to review your patch (e.g. Antoine or Victor). -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue20336 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
