+1 from me. Colm.
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Le 06/06/2017 à 09:29, Brian Burch a écrit : > > On 06/06/17 16:10, Stefan Seelmann wrote: > >> > >>> The two disks are identical and configured as a linux soft RAID array. > >>> They are Hitachi HDS721010CLA332s - 1 Tb 7200 rpm. > >> > >> I'm sure that's the cause. I also tried to build ApacheDS on a server > >> with spinning disks, and it takes forever. I assume that we just do too > >> many sync's when writing data to disk during the tests. > >> > >> @Emmanuel: Is it possible to disable sync-on-write? > >> > > > > I seem to remember my "solution" was to implement some rather nasty > > synchronized static semaphores with finalizers to allow each of the > > several threads within a single test unit to follow each-other's > > progress. I also had to configure jUnit to only run one test unit at a > > time (to protect the statics). It was tricky and ugly, but I was > > desperate to have every test always run properly on any platform. I > > presume this is a surefire problem, not apacheds? > > @Stefan : no, it would not be safe. > > @Brian : SSD is the way to go, but if you don't have one, on linux, the > solution would be to run the build on a ram drive. That should speed up > the build considerably. > > > > >>> To make matters more depressing, I decided to do a clean checkout of > >>> M24 > >>> on my laptop, which is super-slow by comparison. That failed much > >>> earlier (goal apacheds-core-api - missing dependencies) and I will post > >>> those details separately when I get back home again in a couple of > >>> hours > >>> from now. > >> > >> That's probably another reason: The API 1.0.0 which ApacheDS M24 depends > >> on is not yet available in public Maven repo. On your other machine you > >> built it yourself and thus it's in you local maven repo. > > > > You are correct! I copied my local API sandbox to the laptop and then > > re-ran mvn clean. It now fails in exactly the same way as my desktop, > > i.e. > > > > [INFO] Apache Directory API All ........................... SUCCESS [ > > 8.239 s] > > [INFO] Apache Directory LDAP API Client All ............... SUCCESS [ > > 6.523 s] > > [INFO] Apache Directory API Integration Tests ............. SUCCESS [ > > 33.313 s] > > [INFO] Apache Directory API OSGi Integration Tests ........ FAILURE [ > > 59.170 s] > > [INFO] Apache Directory API OSGi Integration Tests 2 ...... SKIPPED > > [INFO] Apache Directory LDAP API Distribution ............. SKIPPED > > [INFO] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > [INFO] BUILD FAILURE > > [INFO] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > [INFO] Total time: 05:57 min > > [INFO] Finished at: 2017-06-06T17:12:59+10:00 > > [INFO] Final Memory: 49M/405M > > [INFO] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal > > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test > > (default-test) on project api-integ-osgi: Execution default-test of > > goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test > > failed: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye. VM > > crash or System.exit called? > > [ERROR] Command was /bin/sh -c cd > > /home/brian/sandboxApache/ldap-api-1.0.0/integ-osgi && > > /usr/lib/jvm/java-8-openjdk-amd64/jre/bin/java -Xmx1024m -jar > > /home/brian/sandboxApache/ldap-api-1.0.0/integ-osgi/target/surefire/ > surefirebooter7386057830129872783.jar > > /home/brian/sandboxApache/ldap-api-1.0.0/integ-osgi/target/surefire/ > surefire806017378512191980tmp > > /home/brian/sandboxApache/ldap-api-1.0.0/integ-osgi/ > target/surefire/surefire_157233883319047368199tmp > > > > You can run it with mvn clean install -Dskiptests, to avoid facing this > issue. > > > > > > >>> (It isn't too late to fire me from the developers team!! I wanted to > >>> help, but it doesn't look like I am yet!) > >> > >> Don't be depressed, your feedback is very helpful! It shows that our > >> software is too big and the build is too complex etc. (but I don't know > >> how to improve and too less time...) > > > > Perhaps you can't change it at the moment, but don't you think it is > > "wrong" that the directory build doesn't include the API? > > > > I think it is excellent that the API can be built stand-alone. (I > > might even consider converting some old applications which still use a > > private copy of the final Netscape LDAP API, along with a LOT of my > > own modifications, which work well against apacheds M23). > > > > On the other hand, it seems strange that the directory build, which > > depends heavily on the API, doesn't build its own copy if one isn't > > already available... > > This is purely temporary. I committed an ApacheDS version that depends > on the 1.0 version of the API, when we usually depend on a snapshot. > Usually, it simply works find as we don't release every week. > > As soon as I will have close the release (tonite), everything will be > back in order. > > > > > > >> Kind Regards, > >> Stefan > > > > Thanks very much for your encouragement. I'll do my best to be > > constructive with my observations. > > Much appreciated ! > > > -- > Emmanuel Lecharny > > Symas.com > directory.apache.org > > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
