Sorry you're feeling bad, Patrick! We can take it from here. I would really like to get some clarification on this test from some of the LE experts. What does it really mean that this test is failing? Is this sort of failure that means that sometimes we have server startup that takes a bit longer because leader gives up the election, or will server startup completely hang due to this? If it's the latter, it should be a high priority fix for 3.4, but if it means that occasionally startup might have to fail and retry once, it might be worth worry about in 3.4.1.
Thoughts? C On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > That's fine (direction re 1-4). However my CI branch 3.4 build failed > over the w/e (once out of four runs). This is AFTER "Preparing for > release 3.4.0 - take 2" was applied (so testing includes 1270, 1264, > etc...) > > Notice testEarlyLeaderAbandonment is failing. I have attached the log > file to ZOOKEEPER-1270 JIRA: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12502838/testEarlyLeaderAbandonment5.txt.gz > > java.lang.RuntimeException: Waiting too long > at > org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.QuorumPeerMainTest.waitForAll(QuorumPeerMainTest.java:324) > at > org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.QuorumPeerMainTest.testEarlyLeaderAbandonment(QuorumPeerMainTest.java:195) > at > org.apache.zookeeper.JUnit4ZKTestRunner$LoggedInvokeMethod.evaluate(JUnit4ZKTestRunner.java:52) > > Should I reopen 1270, or a new jira, or... ? LMK. > > Note - I'm feeling quite ill so I have limited time to provide f/b & > test for the next day or so. > > Patrick > > On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Flavio Junqueira <f...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >> I'm fine with your proposal. -Flavio >> >> On Nov 5, 2011, at 8:15 PM, Camille Fournier wrote: >> >>> 2 has been flaky for so long, not sure whether it's worth being a blocker. >>> The AsyncHammerTests never pass for me locally. Not sure if it's a >>> problem or not... I am tempted to go with Mahadev on this and get this >>> 3.4 release out the door. I would be happy to help manage a 3.4.1 >>> release soon thereafter if we find serious issues. >>> >>> C >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Flavio Junqueira <f...@yahoo-inc.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> If 2) is flakey, we need to fix it, no? >>>> >>>> -Flavio >>>> >>>> On Nov 5, 2011, at 6:14 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: >>>> >>>>> I ran the 1270-1194 patch continually overnight (trunk) in my ci env, >>>>> after ~25 test runs I saw 4 failures: >>>>> >>>>> 1) #402 - QuorumTest.testFollowersStartAfterLeader >>>>> 2) #407 - org.apache.zookeeper.test.FLETest.testLE >>>>> 3) #410 - org.apache.zookeeper.test.AsyncHammerTest.testHammer >>>>> 4) #415 - org.apache.zookeeper.test.AsyncHammerTest.testHammer >>>>> >>>>> 1) client could not connect to reestablished quorum: giving up after >>>>> 30+ seconds. >>>>> 2) known flakey test >>>>> 3) QP failed to shutdown in 30 seconds: >>>>> QuorumPeer[myid=3]0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:11224 >>>>> 4) QP failed to shutdown in 30 seconds: >>>>> QuorumPeer[myid=1]0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:11222 >>>>> >>>>> On the plus side no "testearlyleaderabandon" failures. >>>>> >>>>> On the minus side 3/4 are a bit worrysome. Searching back through all >>>>> my previous failures I don't see this happening. Perhaps these changes >>>>> have shifted some timing? My main concern is that this might be caused >>>>> directly by the patch itself.... >>>>> >>>>> Patrick >>>> >>>> flavio >>>> junqueira >>>> >>>> research scientist >>>> >>>> f...@yahoo-inc.com >>>> direct +34 93-183-8828 >>>> >>>> avinguda diagonal 177, 8th floor, barcelona, 08018, es >>>> phone (408) 349 3300 fax (408) 349 3301 >>>> >>>> >> >> flavio >> junqueira >> >> research scientist >> >> f...@yahoo-inc.com >> direct +34 93-183-8828 >> >> avinguda diagonal 177, 8th floor, barcelona, 08018, es >> phone (408) 349 3300 fax (408) 349 3301 >> >> >
