Geode unit tests 'develop/DistributedTest' took too long to execute

Pipeline results can be found at: Concourse: https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/teams/main/pipelines/develop/jobs/DistributedTest/builds/250

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

+0 The Apache Geode *Log4j* dependency version *2.8.2* is or will cause significant issues for apps, and in particular *Spring Boot* 2.0 apps. This Geode Log4j version is already quite dated as *Log4j 2.11.0* is now already available [1] and *Spring Boot* 2.0 pulls in *Log4j 2.10.0* [2]. *Why

Failed: jinmeiliao/geode#295 (clientCache - 20815d5)

Build Update for jinmeiliao/geode - Build: #295 Status: Failed Duration: 19 minutes and 17 seconds Commit: 20815d5 (clientCache) Author: Jinmei Liao Message: GEODE-5000: do not request/apply cluster config when creating client cache. View the changeset:

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

How about a sub module that only contains acceptance tests? > On Apr 4, 2018, at 4:42 PM, Kirk Lund wrote: > > Nick made the changes necessary to open up AcceptanceTest to other Geode > submodules and it takes too long. The cause is what Jared mentioned. > Basically, Gradle

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

Nick made the changes necessary to open up AcceptanceTest to other Geode submodules and it takes too long. The cause is what Jared mentioned. Basically, Gradle forks a new JVM for every *Test in our code base and then executes JUnit which queries the test class for Category and either runs or

[Spring CI] Spring Data GemFire > Nightly-ApacheGeode > #877 was SUCCESSFUL (with 2384 tests). Change made by Mark Paluch.

--- Spring Data GemFire > Nightly-ApacheGeode > #877 was successful. --- Scheduled with changes by Mark Paluch. 2386 tests in total.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

+1 for releasing this RC On 3/30/18 12:15 PM, Swapnil Bawaskar wrote: Both issues mentioned in the RC1 vote thread have been resolved. This is the second release

Errored: apache/geode-native#977 (develop - fc9c81c)

Build Update for apache/geode-native - Build: #977 Status: Errored Duration: 49 minutes and 30 seconds Commit: fc9c81c (develop) Author: Ernie Burghardt Message: Geode 4799: Removing static members from Serializable * Cleanup warnings * Replace

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

Mine was a +1 for both actually -- Mike Stolz Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Lead Mobile: +1-631-835-4771 Download the new GemFire book here. On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Jinmei Liao wrote:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

+1 for release. On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:24 PM, Joey McAllister wrote: > Mike: Just for clarification, is yours a +1 for the release or a +1 to > extending the vote? > > Thanks, > Joey > > > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:21 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > +1

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

Mike: Just for clarification, is yours a +1 for the release or a +1 to extending the vote? Thanks, Joey On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 12:21 PM Dan Smith wrote: > +1 to an extension of time > > +1 to this release - ran geode-release-check, looks good to me. > > -Dan > > On Wed,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

+1 to an extension of time +1 to this release - ran geode-release-check, looks good to me. -Dan On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Michael Stolz wrote: > +1 > > -- > Mike Stolz > > On Apr 4, 2018 2:06 PM, "Joey McAllister" wrote: > > > +1 to Anthony's

Re: 1.5.0 needs a bugfix

+1 I believe this means we have 3 or 4 +1 votes and zero -1 votes. -- Mike Stolz Principal Engineer - Gemfire Product Manager Mobile: 631-835-4771 On Apr 4, 2018 1:49 PM, "Bruce Schuchardt" wrote: > Well, I went to merge this into a 1.5.0 based branch and found that I

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

+1 -- Mike Stolz On Apr 4, 2018 2:06 PM, "Joey McAllister" wrote: > +1 to Anthony's recommendation of extending the vote by 24 hours, since > some community members might have ignored this one, thinking that the > negative vote would lead to a new release

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

+1 to Anthony's recommendation of extending the vote by 24 hours, since some community members might have ignored this one, thinking that the negative vote would lead to a new release candidate/vote. On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:59 AM Anthony Baker wrote: > Bruce updated his

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.5.0.RC2

Bruce updated his vote (retracting the -1) in a different thread. That leaves us with one vote cast thus far which is not sufficient. I suggest we extend the vote window an extra 24h to allow additional time to review and vote. Anthony > On Apr 2, 2018, at 3:13 PM, Bruce Schuchardt

Re: 1.5.0 needs a bugfix

Well, I went to merge this into a 1.5.0 based branch and found that I was wrong.  The serialization changes that caused GEODE-4989 are /not/ in the release/1.5.0 branch. I'm taking back my negative vote on the 1.5.0 release candidate. Sorry for the alarm folks. On 4/4/18 9:49 AM, Bruce

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

Just FYI, the reason that :acceptanceTest is currently only a target of precheckin is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3296 For the full details, see this thread on the Gradle Forums: https://discuss.gradle.org/t/test-task-with-forkevery-1-and-includecategories-performs-poorly/23401

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

+1. AcceptanceTest seems fittings, although... That test category was created with the focus on tests that run gfsh scripts via the GfshRule. Because the GfshRule uses the built jar and actually launches gfsh to run its tests, all current AcceptanceTests exist in geode-assembly. Perhaps as an

1.5.0 needs a bugfix

I've checked in the fix for GEODE-4989 and it needs to be in the 1.5.0 release.  The SHA is 3c263e9220cd56486e3ec4d39cdd0a694482fb49

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

+1 to using AcceptanceTest category for the end-to-end JDBC connector service tests On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Nick Reich wrote: > Using AcceptanceTest category seems like a good solution at the moment to > me. > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Sean Goller

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

Using AcceptanceTest category seems like a good solution at the moment to me. On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Sean Goller wrote: > I'm actually fine with putting it in AcceptanceTest for now. > > Ideally I'd like to see something like JDBC connection strings that could > be