@Ishan ~ Can you look at the question Mike raised about
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15135 please?
So the AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest has a number of hard-coded wait times
in it. While I can appreciate the need for waiting to see state changes
occur, tests like this aren't great for CI and RC smoke tests given the
variability of hardware. Case in point, I made this change:
```
*diff --git
a/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/handler/admin/AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest.java
b/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/handler/admin/AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest.java*
*index a9eea7f7ca5..3b2d39c3317 100644*
*---
a/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/handler/admin/AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest.java*
*+++
b/solr/core/src/test/org/apache/solr/handler/admin/AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest.java*
@@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ public class AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest extends
SolrCloudTestCase {
boolean await = actionFiredLatch.await(60, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
assertTrue("action did not execute", await);
- await = listenerFiredLatch.await(60, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
+ await = listenerFiredLatch.await(120, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
assertTrue("listener did not execute", await);
waitForRecovery(COLL_NAME);
```
And of course, beasting passes 5 out of 5; it fails pretty consistently on
the first run w/o this change. So I vote we @BadApple this test for 8.8.1
and move forward with RC2 now that Ishan's changes are in. Moreover, since
we removed auto-scaling from master, holding up a critical bug fix for a
test that fails intermittently b/c of timing seems imprudent. I'm also
biased in that I want to get the fix for 15145 out ASAP ;-)
On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 9:08 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds good, Tim. I've ported the fix to the release branch. Just ran the
> tests to make sure it works fine.
> Thanks for the extra work you'll have to do (RC2) in order to save me
> future work (8.8.2). Really owe you one!
>
> > Are there other fixes you're aware of that are slated for 8.8.2 @Ishan
> Chattopadhyaya <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>?
> I am not aware of anything else.
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 9:19 PM Timothy Potter <thelabd...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I'm beasting AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest locally now, I haven't seen
>> that one fail on my side yet.
>>
>> As far as respin 8.8.1 RC, it's not a problem for me and I prefer that to
>> doing an 8.8.2 soon after 8.8.1 comes out. Are there other fixes you're
>> aware of that are slated for 8.8.2 @Ishan Chattopadhyaya
>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com>? In other words, if the fix for 15138 is all
>> that will be in 8.8.2, let's just include it in 8.8.1 and hopefully we
>> won't need an 8.8.2 ;-)
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 7:01 AM Michael Sokolov <msoko...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm, I got a failure on
>>> org.apache.solr.handler.admin.AutoscalingHistoryHandlerTest.testHistory,
>>> but it did not reproduce (tried twice). Would that possibly also be
>>> addressed by those fixes?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 7:38 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya
>>> <ichattopadhy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > The failure seems to be because of a timeout during collection
>>> > > creation
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for digging in. Seems like that is the exact class of fix that
>>> we did for SOLR-15138 and are planning for 8.8.2. Shall we backport that
>>> fix to the release branch now (for RC2 or 8.8.2)?
>>> >
>>> > > My h/w is really fast and beefy and may be that's why it doesn't get
>>> reproduced.
>>> > Same here, Ryzen 9 5950X (fastest mainstream CPU out there).
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 5:36 PM Michael McCandless <
>>> luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Curious, the smoke tester passed for me on the first try:
>>> >>
>>> >> SUCCESS! [0:44:29.979512]
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Mike McCandless
>>> >>
>>> >> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:26 AM Timothy Potter <
>>> thelabd...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Please vote for release candidate 1 for Lucene/Solr 8.8.1
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The artifacts can be downloaded from:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-8.8.1-RC1-rev6a50a0315ac7e4979abb0b530857c7795bb3b928
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> You can run the smoke tester directly with this command:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> python3 -u dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py \
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/lucene/lucene-solr-8.8.1-RC1-rev6a50a0315ac7e4979abb0b530857c7795bb3b928
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours i.e. until 2021-02-17
>>> 17:00 UTC.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Here is my +1 ~ SUCCESS! [0:50:06.728441]
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> In addition to the smoke test, I built a Docker image from
>>> solr-8.8.1.tgz locally and verified:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> a. A rolling upgrade of a 3-node 8.7.0 cluster to the 8.8.1 RC
>>> completes successfully w/o any NPEs or weirdness with leader election /
>>> recoveries.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> b. The base_url property is stored in replica state after the upgrade
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> c. A basic client application built with SolrJ 8.7.0 can load
>>> cluster state info directly from ZK and query the 8.8.1 RC1 servers.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> d. Same client app built with SolrJ 8.8.0 works as well.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> As this bug-fix release is primarily needed to address a SolrJ
>>> back-compat break (SOLR-15145) and unfortunately our smoke tester framework
>>> does not test for backcompat of older SolrJ against the RC, I ask others to
>>> please test rolling upgrades of servers (ideally multi-node clusters)
>>> running pre-8.8.0 to this RC if possible. Also, please try client
>>> applications that are using an older SolrJ, esp. those that load cluster
>>> state directly from ZK.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Best regards,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Tim
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>>>
>>>
