On 29/04/2015 00:53, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
Hello,
I'd like to get this changeset, or something close to it, pushed soon
so we can start taking advantage of better failure triaging.
Any further concerns?
I should have been clearer, I don't have any issues with the proposed
patch. I was
Hello,
I'd like to get this changeset, or something close to it, pushed soon so
we can start taking advantage of better failure triaging.
Any further concerns?
Thanks,
-Joe
On 4/24/2015 11:04 AM, joe darcy wrote:
On 4/23/2015 10:58 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 24/04/2015 02:54, Joseph D.
On 24/04/2015 02:54, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
Hello,
Any additional comments on marking with tests in question with a
randomness keyword?
Thanks,
-Joe
I don't object to this keyword although I should say that most of the
(apparent) randomness that I've seen hasn't been because of tests
Hi Daniel,
On 4/22/2015 1:31 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 22/04/15 04:13, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
One goal of marking the tests using randomness is to help root out some
remaining intermittent test failures. If one of the randomness tests is
observed to fail intermittently, if it has not already
On 22/04/15 04:13, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
One goal of marking the tests using randomness is to help root out some
remaining intermittent test failures. If one of the randomness tests is
observed to fail intermittently, if it has not already been updated to
print out the random seed and be able
On 4/22/15 4:31 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 22/04/15 04:13, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
One goal of marking the tests using randomness is to help root out some
remaining intermittent test failures. If one of the randomness tests is
observed to fail intermittently, if it has not already been updated
Hello,
As the next step of implementing Proposed new policies for JDK 9
regression tests: tiered testing, intermittent failures, and randomness
[1], please review this changeset which adds a randomness jtreg
keyword and tags 240 regression tests in the jdk repository with the
keyword:
