[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8849?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15194395#comment-15194395
]
Mark Miller commented on SOLR-8849:
-----------------------------------
Makes sense to me. I don't see a problem with the change.
> ChaosMonkey should cuase chaos in a more reproducible manner
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-8849
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8849
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Test
> Reporter: Hoss Man
> Assignee: Hoss Man
>
> Looking into the ChaosMonkey code a bit, and it seems like this class --
> particularly the way {{monkeyThread}} is defined -- uses randomness in a way
> that makes it extremely unlikely that it will ever create reproducible
> failures.
> Obviously in any test where there are multiple concurrent threads, timing
> issues might prevent test reproducibility -- but in this case, even the
> sequence of "chaos" actions the monkeyThread takes won't be reproducible if
> anyother concurrent test thread accesses {{LuceneTestCase.random()}} ...
> {code}
> public void run() {
> while (!stop) {
> try {
>
> Random random = LuceneTestCase.random();
> // ... lots of stuff using random, or calling methods that use
> LuceneTestCase.random() directly
> {code}
> It seems like it would be a lot better if ChaosMonkey's constructor created
> it's own private {{Random chaosRand}} using {{LuceneTestCase.random()}} as a
> seed, and then used {{chaosRand}} to make all random choices in it's methods.
> That way at least the sequence of chaotic operations made by ChaosMonkey
> would be consistent for a given test seed, even if the exact
> timing/interleaving of those operations relative to other operations by other
> threads couldn't be garunteed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
