Scott can you take a look? -Jordan
> On May 25, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Cameron McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Tree cache tests are still failing. I've tried a few times but no love: > > TestTreeCacheEventOrdering>TestEventOrdering.testEventOrdering:151 actual 6 > expected -31: > > I will have a look into what's going on in the morning. Given that these > may take some messing about to fix up, do we just want to vote on 2.11.0 > separately, as that is all ready to go? > cheers > > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Jordan Zimmerman < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Great news. Thanks. >> >> ==================== >> Jordan Zimmerman >> >>> On May 25, 2016, at 12:37 AM, Cameron McKenzie <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> I have fixed up the test case, all good now. >>> >>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Cameron McKenzie < >> [email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Looks like it was introduced with the schema validation stuff. It now >> does >>>> an ACL check prior to the backgrounding call. Because the unit test >> uses a >>>> bogus ACL provider it just throws an exception >>>> >>>> final String adjustedPath = >>>> adjustPath(client.fixForNamespace(givenPath, >> createMode.isSequential())); >>>> List<ACL> aclList = acling.getAclList(adjustedPath); >>>> >>>> client.getSchemaSet().getSchema(givenPath).validateCreate(createMode, >> data, >>>> aclList); >>>> >>>> String returnPath = null; >>>> if ( backgrounding.inBackground() ) >>>> { >>>> pathInBackground(adjustedPath, data, givenPath); >>>> >>>> So, I guess the answer is to get the test to force a failure in a >>>> different way. With the UnhandledErrorListener, the expectation is that >>>> this only gets called on backgrounding operations? >>>> cheers >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Cameron McKenzie < >> [email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Same on the master branch, but it passes there, so maybe something has >>>>> legitimately broken the test. Will let you know if I get stuck. >>>>> cheers >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Jordan Zimmerman < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Let me know if you need help. >>>>>> >>>>>> It might be a bad merge. Have you compared it to the master branch? >>>>>> >>>>>> -JZ >>>>>> >>>>>>>> On May 24, 2016, at 10:31 PM, Cameron McKenzie < >> [email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Guys, >>>>>>> There's a test TestFrameworkBackground:testErrorListener that is >>>>>> failing >>>>>>> consistently on the CURATOR-3.0 branch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I can't see how it has ever worked. It seems to try and provoke an >>>>>> error >>>>>>> via a bad ACL provider. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But this ACL provider is called by the CreateBuilderImpl prior to the >>>>>>> backgrounding call, which means that the exception that it throws >>>>>> happens >>>>>>> in the main Thread of the unit test. So, it just throws an >>>>>>> UnsupportedOperationException which is propogated up the stack at >> which >>>>>>> point the unit test fails. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, I will look at fixing this, but I just don't understand how it >> ever >>>>>>> worked? >>>>>>> cheers >>>> >>
