It timed out while running OldFreeListOffHeapRegionJUnitTest but I think
the tests before it were responsible for the timeout being exceeded. I
looked through all of the previously run tests and how long each but
without having some sort of database with how long each test takes, it's
impossible to know which test or tests take longer in any given PR.

The IntegrationTest job that exceeded the timeout:
https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/builds/147866

The Test Summary for the above IntegrationTest job with Duration for each
test:
http://files.apachegeode-ci.info/builds/apache-develop-pr/geode-pr-4963/test-results/integrationTest/1587061092/

Unless we want to start tracking each test class/method and its Duration in
a database, I don't see how we could look for trends or changes to identify
test(s) that suddenly start taking longer. All of the tests take less than
3 minutes each, so unless one suddenly spikes to 10 minutes or more,
there's really no way to find the test(s).

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 12:52 PM Owen Nichols <onich...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Kirk, most IntegrationTest jobs run in 25-30 minutes, but I did see one <
> https://concourse.apachegeode-ci.info/teams/main/pipelines/apache-develop-pr/jobs/IntegrationTestOpenJDK11/builds/7202>
> that came in just under 45 minutes but did succeed.  It would be nice to
> know what test is occasionally taking longer and why…
>
> Here’s an example of a previous timeout increase (Note that both the job
> timeout and the callstack timeout should be increased by the same amount):
> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/4231
>
> > On Apr 16, 2020, at 10:47 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, IntegrationTest exceeds timeout every time I trigger it.
> The
> > cause does not appear to be a specific test or hang. I
> > think IntegrationTest has already been running very close to the timeout
> > and is exceeding it fairly often even without my changes in #4963.
> >
> > Should we increase the timeout for IntegrationTest? (Anyone know how to
> > increase it?)
>
>

Reply via email to