Everyone donates their time as they can. I'm glad your donating yours to help look into some test fails!
I've helped look into / fix a lot myself, and I'm as unfamiliar with many Solr areas as you are. I guess this what happens when you take a bunch of tests for a larger test system that ran pretty well once a day serially and start running them in parallel and all the time on many machines over and over. And then add a bunch of distributed tests running lots of jetty instances, etc. A lot of the other committers didn't really sign up for that change - we really increased the challenge of writing Solr tests that never fail by like a factor of 20! Since I was part of making this change, I've been trying to help out where I can! I can see where some Lucene centric people would be like, what the hell, Lucene tests fail less - but I've been in both camps, and the situation is that it's easy to make Lucene tests for this heavy environment, and it's been a lot of work getting Solr tests solid. That's one of the joys of Lucene - no jetty, no dependencies, no heavy application infrastructure. But non the less, the Solr tests have been improving all the time. Special thanks to Dawid and others in helping make that happen! If you look at some other similar Apache projects that are no libraries and their test code, they would end up being just as difficult to harden to this level. IMO, it's been worth it though! I can run tests in 4 minutes instead of 40, and all the extra test runs find more bugs. So instead of complaining, I'll just keep pitching in to help when I find time. - Mark On Dec 8, 2012, at 7:30 AM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > My concern is actually that people are just filtering and not looking at test > failures. > > If thats the case, lets not waste valuable computing resources then. we can > do something else with them: such as additional coverage of lucene's test > suite. > > Otherwise, lets unfilter the fails and instead just fix them. The current > situation is very sad: > I fixed a RAM leak in a solr test earlier this week. The exception in the > failure basically told you exactly how to fix it. It was clear to me nobody > really even looked at this fail, it was so easy to fix. > I looked at the J9 bug, honestly i just did basic stuff (not knowing really > anything about solr distributed search). like download the JVM, run tests > with -Xint, and so on. Its like nobody really cares. > > Anyway I guess I'm just frustrated. I'd really like these tests to become > stable, and I'd like to help too, but I can barely even help because I don't > really know solr. Its going to take more people. > > > On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Dec 8, 2012, at 5:40 AM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > makes it easier to navigate my gmail by far > > If that's your concern, ever hear of a filter :) > > - Mark > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
