Andrey, Thanks! I've consulted with the IntelliJ IDEA source code and found how this disabled plugins file should look like. I've created a new issue [1] and prepared PR [2] with the set of disabled plugins (maybe not complete set). I don't have access to change corresponding `~Excluded [Inspections] Core Debug` test suite properties. Can we test this PR?
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10682 [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5666 On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 17:35, Andrey Mashenkov <andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Maxim, > > Idea has a file in config directory ./config/disabled_plugins.txt , you can > easily find it at you local machine. > Teamcity Inspections runner has an option "Disabled plugins" where > disabled_plugins.txt file content can be set. > > So, looks like we can disable useless plugins. > But I'm not expert and can't suggest changes we can safely apply. > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 4:59 PM Maxim Muzafarov <maxmu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Andrey, >> >> Thank you for solving this issue with GC pauses! I've checked the >> given report. The inspections configuration is correct, but it seems >> to me that we have enabled by default rules of included plugins (for >> instance, KotlinInternalInJava in the report is enabled). >> >> Can you share more details about `disable plugin` option you found? >> >> I see that idea instance starts with the default -Didea.plugins.path >> system property, can we change it so the plugins will be not loaded by >> default? >> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 15:45, Andrey Mashenkov >> <andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Maxim, >> > >> > It looks like we can't make logs more verbose due to possible bug, I've >> > create a ticket in Jetbrains Jira [1]. >> > We can just publish idea logs in artefacts as suggested in this manual [2]. >> > >> > For now, Inspections logs looks like this one [3]. >> > Also, would you please to take a look at inspection report and check if we >> > missed smth and there are any unwanted inspection turned on. >> > >> > [1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/TW-58422 >> > [2] >> > https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Reporting+Issues#ReportingIssues-IntelliJIDEAInspections >> > [3] >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=2538111&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_ExcludedInspections2&tab=artifacts >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 3:19 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Maxim M, do you know if we can disable inspections by wildcard? E.g. >> >> Android* ? >> >> >> >> чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 14:59, Andrey Mashenkov >> >> <andrey.mashen...@gmail.com>: >> >> >> >> > Fixed memory issues with increasing heap size and forcing G1GC. >> >> > >> >> > Do we need all these plugins loaded for inspections? >> >> > I've found a 'disable plugin' option in TC Inspections build >> >> > configuration, >> >> > but it is unclear how to disable plugin correctly. >> >> > Can someone take over this? >> >> > >> >> > > 46 plugins initialized in 1031 ms >> >> > > 2018-12-13 10:55:24,875 [ 1342] INFO - llij.ide.plugins.PluginManager >> >> > > - >> >> > > Loaded bundled plugins: Android Support (10.2.3), Ant Support (1.0), >> >> > > CSS >> >> > > Support (172.4574.11), Database Tools and SQL (172.4574.11), Eclipse >> >> > > Integration (3.0), FreeMarker support (1.0), GWT Support (1.0), Gradle >> >> > > (172.4574.11), Groovy (9.0), Guice (8.0), HTML Tools (2.0), Hibernate >> >> > > Support (1.0), I18n for Java (172.4574.11), IDEA CORE (172.4574.11), >> >> > > IntelliLang (8.0), JBoss Seam Support (1.0), JUnit (1.0), Java EE: >> >> > > Bean >> >> > > Validation Support (1.1), Java EE: Contexts and Dependency Injection >> >> > (1.1), >> >> > > Java EE: EJB, JPA, Servlets (1.0), Java EE: Java Server Faces >> >> > > (2.2.X.), >> >> > > Java EE: Web Services (JAX-WS) (1.9), Java Server Pages (JSP) >> >> > > Integration >> >> > > (1.0), JavaScript Support (1.0), Kotlin (1.1.4-release-IJ2017.2-3), >> >> > > Maven >> >> > > Integration (172.4574.11), Persistence Frameworks Support (1.0), >> >> > > Plugin >> >> > > DevKit (1.0), Properties Support (172.4574.11), QuirksMode >> >> > > (172.4574.11), >> >> > > Spring AOP/@AspectJ (1.0), Spring Batch (1.0), Spring Data (1.0), >> >> > > Spring >> >> > > Integration Patterns (1.0), Spring Security (1.0), Spring Support >> >> > > (1.0), >> >> > > Spring Web Flow (1.0), Spring Web Services (1.0), Struts 1.x (2.0), >> >> > Struts >> >> > > 2 (1.0), TestNG-J (8.0), UI Designer (172.4574.11), Velocity support >> >> > (1.0), >> >> > > W3C Validators (2.0), WebLogic Integration (1.0), XPathView + XSLT >> >> > Support >> >> > > (4) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Kotlin plugins fails to start, let's disable it. >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > 2018-12-13 10:55:27,623 [ 4090] INFO - >> >> > il.indexing.FileBasedIndexImpl - Rebuild requested for index >> >> > org.jetbrains.kotlin.idea.versions.KotlinJvmMetadataVersionIndex >> >> > > java.lang.Throwable >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.util.indexing.FileBasedIndex.requestRebuild(FileBasedIndex.java:68) >> >> > > at >> >> > org.jetbrains.kotlin.idea.versions.KotlinUpdatePluginComponent.initComponent(KotlinUpdatePluginComponent.kt:54) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.components.impl.ComponentManagerImpl$ComponentConfigComponentAdapter.getComponentInstance(ComponentManagerImpl.java:492) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.components.impl.ComponentManagerImpl.createComponents(ComponentManagerImpl.java:118) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.a(ApplicationImpl.java:462) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.createComponents(ApplicationImpl.java:466) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.components.impl.ComponentManagerImpl.init(ComponentManagerImpl.java:102) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.load(ApplicationImpl.java:421) >> >> > > at >> >> > com.intellij.openapi.application.impl.ApplicationImpl.load(ApplicationImpl.java:407) >> >> > > at >> >> > > com.intellij.idea.IdeaApplication.run(IdeaApplication.java:203) >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > Sure, let's apply. I hope all TC agents may handle 4G heap. >> >> > > >> >> > > чт, 13 дек. 2018 г. в 12:54, Andrey Mashenkov < >> >> > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com >> >> > > >: >> >> > > >> >> > > > Guys, >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I've just creates a copy of Inspections TC build task with GC logs >> >> > turned >> >> > > > on to check if there is any issues >> >> > > > and found Inspections task spent too much time in STW due to long >> >> > > > Full >> >> > GC >> >> > > > pauses. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I've tried to increase Xmx up to 4Gb and use G1GC got 2+ times >> >> > > > better >> >> > > > execution time down to ~15 min (~17 for 2G heap). >> >> > > > Increasing heap size only is not very helpful as it just postpone >> >> > > > Full >> >> > GC >> >> > > > issues, but changing GC to G1GC gives noticeable result. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Let's apply this optimization. >> >> > > > Thoughts? >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 12:43 PM Vyacheslav Daradur < >> >> > daradu...@gmail.com> >> >> > > > wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> > > > > Hi, Maxim, Nikolay, I have the following questions regarding >> >> > > inspections: >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Should 'gnite_inspections_teamcity.xml' been imported into IDEA, >> >> > since >> >> > > > > 'ignite_inspections.xml' has been removed in actual master? >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Also, I've faced mismatching: if I use >> >> > > > > '@SuppressWarnings("ErrorNotRethrown")' in code, then this will be >> >> > > > > marked on TC as "Redundant suppression". If I removed this >> >> > suppression >> >> > > > > in "main" code base (not in tests) then it's fine and IDE does not >> >> > > > > mark the code by inspection. But, if I use >> >> > > > > 'GridTestUtils#assertThrows' in 'tests' code base, then IDE >> >> > > > > requires >> >> > > > > to suppress the inspection, if I have done it then TC marks this >> >> > > > > as >> >> > > > > "Redundant suppression". >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > What should I do in this case? >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 10:26 PM Andrey Mashenkov >> >> > > > > <andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Hi, >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Have someone tried to investigate the issue related to >> >> > > > > > Inspection >> >> > TC >> >> > > > task >> >> > > > > > execution time variation (from 0.5 up to 1,5 hours)? >> >> > > > > > Can we enable GC logs for this task or may be even get CPU, >> >> > > > > > Disk, >> >> > > > Network >> >> > > > > > metrics? >> >> > > > > > Can someone check if there are unnecessary Idea plugins starts >> >> > > > > > that >> >> > > can >> >> > > > > be >> >> > > > > > safely disabled? >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 5:52 PM Dmitriy Pavlov >> >> > > > > > <dpav...@apache.org >> >> > > >> >> > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > I'm totally with you in this decision, let's move the file. >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > вт, 27 нояб. 2018 г. в 16:24, Maxim Muzafarov < >> >> > maxmu...@gmail.com >> >> > > >: >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Igniters, >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > I propose to make inspection configuration default on the >> >> > project >> >> > > > > > > > level. I've created a new issue [1] for it. It can be easily >> >> > done >> >> > > > and >> >> > > > > > > > recommend by IntelliJ documentation [2]. >> >> > > > > > > > Thoughts? >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Vyacheslav, >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Can you share an example of your warnings? >> >> > > > > > > > Currently, we have different inspection configurations: >> >> > > > > > > > - ignite_inspections.xml - to import inspections as default >> >> > > > > > > > and >> >> > > use >> >> > > > > it >> >> > > > > > > > daily. >> >> > > > > > > > - ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml - config to run it on TC. >> >> > Only >> >> > > > > fixed >> >> > > > > > > > rules in the project code are enabled. Each of these rules >> >> > > > > > > > are >> >> > > > marked >> >> > > > > > > > with ERROR level. >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10422 >> >> > > > > > > > [2] https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html >> >> > > > > > > > On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 at 13:58, Nikolay Izhikov < >> >> > > nizhi...@apache.org >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Hello, Vyacheslav. >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Yes, we have. >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Maxim Muzafarov, can you fix it, please? >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > вт, 20 нояб. 2018 г., 13:10 Vyacheslav Daradur >> >> > > > daradu...@gmail.com >> >> > > > > : >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Guys, why we have 2 different inspection files in the >> >> > > > > > > > > > repo? >> >> > > > > > > > > > idea\ignite_inspections.xml >> >> > > > > > > > > > idea\ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > AFAIK TeamCity is able to use the same inspection file >> >> > > > > > > > > > with >> >> > > > IDE. >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > I've imported 'idea\ignite_inspections.xml' in the IDE, >> >> > > > > > > > > > but >> >> > > now >> >> > > > > see >> >> > > > > > > > > > inspection warnings for my PR on TC because of different >> >> > > rules. >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 6:06 PM Maxim Muzafarov < >> >> > > > > maxmu...@gmail.com> >> >> > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Yakov, Dmitry, >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Which example of unsuccessful suite execution do we >> >> > > > > > > > > > > need? >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Does the current fail [1] in the master branch enough >> >> > > > > > > > > > > to >> >> > > > > configure >> >> > > > > > > > > > > notifications by TC.Bot? >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Please consider adding more checks >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > - line endings. I think we should only have \n >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > - ensure blank line at the end of file >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that `line endings` is easy to add, but >> >> > for >> >> > > > the >> >> > > > > > > `blank >> >> > > > > > > > > > > line at the end` we need as special regexp. Can we >> >> > > > > > > > > > > focus >> >> > on >> >> > > > > > > built-in >> >> > > > > > > > > > > IntelliJ inspections at first and fix others special >> >> > > further? >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > [1] >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >> >> > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 11 Nov 2018 at 17:55, Maxim Muzafarov < >> >> > > > > maxmu...@gmail.com> >> >> > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Igniters, >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Since the inspection rules are included in RunAll a >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > few >> >> > > > > members >> >> > > > > > > of >> >> > > > > > > > the >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > community mentioned a wide distributed execution >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > time >> >> > on >> >> > > TC >> >> > > > > > > agents: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > - 1h:27m:38s publicagent17_9094 >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > - 38m:04s publicagent17_9094 >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > - 33m:29s publicagent17_9094 >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > - 17m:13s publicagent17_9094 >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that we should configure the resources >> >> > > > distribution >> >> > > > > > > > across TC >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > containers. Can anyone take a look at it? >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > I've also prepared the short list of rules to work >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > on: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Inconsistent line separators (6 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Problematic whitespace (4 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + expression.equals("literal")' rather than >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > '"literal".equals(expression) (53 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Unnecessary 'null' check before 'instanceof' >> >> > expression >> >> > > > or >> >> > > > > call >> >> > > > > > > > (42 >> >> > > > > > > > > > matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Redundant 'if' statement (69 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Redundant interface declaration (28 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Double negation (0 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Unnecessary code block (472 matches) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > + Line is longer than allowed by code style (2614 >> >> > > matches) >> >> > > > > (Is it >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > possible to implement?) >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 at 23:43, Dmitriy Pavlov < >> >> > > > > > > > dpavlov....@gmail.com> >> >> > > > > > > > > > wrote: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Maxim, >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > thank you for your efforts to make this happen. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Keep >> >> > > the >> >> > > > > pace! >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you please provide an example of how >> >> > Inspections >> >> > > > can >> >> > > > > > > fail, >> >> > > > > > > > so >> >> > > > > > > > > > I or >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > another contributor could implement support of >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > these >> >> > > > > failures >> >> > > > > > > > > > validation in >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the Tc Bot. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > пт, 26 окт. 2018 г. в 18:27, Yakov Zhdanov < >> >> > > > > > > yzhda...@apache.org >> >> > > > > > > > >: >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maxim, >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for response, let's do it the way you >> >> > > suggested. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please consider adding more checks >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - line endings. I think we should only have \n >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - ensure blank line in the end of file >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > All these are code reviews issues I pointed out >> >> > many >> >> > > > > times >> >> > > > > > > when >> >> > > > > > > > > > reviewing >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > conributions. It would be cool if we have TC >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > build >> >> > > > > failing if >> >> > > > > > > > > > there is any. >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > --Yakov >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > -- >> >> > > > > > > > > > Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > -- >> >> > > > > > Best regards, >> >> > > > > > Andrey V. Mashenkov >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > -- >> >> > > > > Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > -- >> >> > > > Best regards, >> >> > > > Andrey V. Mashenkov >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Best regards, >> >> > Andrey V. Mashenkov >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards, >> > Andrey V. Mashenkov > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrey V. Mashenkov
