Hi Flavio, >>>>>>> testShouldGetTwoFrgamentsIfTwoBookiesFailedInSameEnsemble(org.apache.bookkeeper.client.TestLedgerChecker): >>>>>>> test timed out after 3000 milliseconds
I could see the following call can take some amount of time Set<LedgerFragment> result = getUnderReplicatedFragments(lh); I think, will get some hint if you can get the logs and do the analysis. Do you have the logs available with you. Regards, Rakesh -----Original Message----- From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:fpjunque...@yahoo.com.INVALID] Sent: 20 March 2015 13:51 To: Sijie Guo Cc: dev@bookkeeper.apache.org Subject: Re: RC for 4.3.1? I've actually been able to get most of the tests to pass by adding an entry to /etc/hosts. I got only different test failure this time around: testShouldGetTwoFrgamentsIfTwoBookiesFailedInSameEnsemble(org.apache.bookkeeper.client.TestLedgerChecker): test timed out after 3000 milliseconds > On 19 Mar 2015, at 22:54, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yup. But it seems that your vm returns IP address as hostname. I guess that > might be related your vm's DNS entry in cloud environment. > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fpjunque...@yahoo.com > <mailto:fpjunque...@yahoo.com>> wrote: > I'm not sure this is right. When I run locally, I get this in the logs of > CookieTest > > Host address: 127.0.0.1 > Host name: localhost > > while in the vm I get this: > > Host address: 10.0.0.4 > Host name: 10.0.0.4 > > "Host name" is what I get here in Bookie.java: > > if (conf.getUseHostNameAsBookieID()) { > hostAddress = inetAddr.getAddress().getCanonicalHostName(); > LOG.info("Host name: " + hostAddress); > } > > It shouldn't be returning the IP address, no? > > -Flavio > >> On 19 Mar 2015, at 17:08, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com >> <mailto:guosi...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> The hostname in that host will be resolved to be IP, which the IP and >> hostname would be same. But the tests expect that the IP and hostname are >> different. >> >> We should change the tool to allow passing in any bookie id, which would >> make the tests more deterministic. >> >> - Sijie >> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Flavio Junqueira >> <fpjunque...@yahoo.com.invalid <mailto:fpjunque...@yahoo.com.invalid>> wrote: >> Sijie, >> The problem seems to be that the public address (the one the hostname maps >> to) and the virtual network are different. The tests that are failing seem >> to expect that they are the same. Does it make sense? >> -Flavio >> >> >> On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 5:12 AM, Rakesh R <rake...@huawei.com >> <mailto:rake...@huawei.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Can we include BOOKKEEPER-834 fix also in 4.3.1, this is addressing one test >> case failure. >> >> -Rakesh >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sijie Guo [mailto:guosi...@gmail.com <mailto:guosi...@gmail.com>] >> Sent: 18 March 2015 10:23 >> To: dev@bookkeeper.apache.org <mailto:dev@bookkeeper.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: RC for 4.3.1? >> >> I think RC0 is failed because of the failed tests. We need to address those >> tests for producing the new RC. >> >> - Sijie >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Flavio Junqueira < >> fpjunque...@yahoo.com.invalid <mailto:fpjunque...@yahoo.com.invalid>> wrote: >> >> > Do we have a code freeze on branch 4.3 right now because of release 4.3.1? >> > I'm actually not sure what's going on with the RC0 of 4.3.1. >> > >> > -Flavio >> >> >> >> >> > >
