Thanks for looking into it Todd. Let's first see if you think it can be fixed quickly. Let me know.
Thanks, Nige On Jan 5, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote: > On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Nigel Daley <nda...@mac.com> wrote: > >> Todd, would love to get >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-2121 fixed first since >> this is failing every night on trunk. >> > > What if we disable that test, move that issue to 0.22 blocker, and then > enable the test-patch? I'll also look into that one today, but if it's > something that will take a while to fix, I don't think we should hold off > the useful testing for all the other patches. > > -Todd > > On Jan 5, 2011, at 2:45 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote: >> >>> Hi Nigel, >>> >>> MAPREDUCE-2172 has been fixed for a while. Are there any other particular >>> JIRAs you think need to be fixed before the MR test-patch queue gets >>> enabled? I have a lot of outstanding patches and doing all the test-patch >>> turnaround manually on 3 different boxes is a real headache. >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Todd >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Nigel Daley <nda...@mac.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Ok, HDFS is now enabled. You'll see a stream of updates shortly on the >> ~30 >>>> Patch Available HDFS issues. >>>> >>>> Nige >>>> >>>> On Dec 20, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: >>>> >>>>> I committed HDFS-1511 this morning. We should be good to go. I can >>>>> haz snooty robot butler? >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> Thanks Jacob. I am wasted already but I can do it on Sun, I think, >>>>>> unless it is done earlier. >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Take care, >>>>>> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 19:41, Jakob Homan <jgho...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Ok. I'll get a patch out for 1511 tomorrow, unless someone wants to >>>>>>> whip one up tonight. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Nigel Daley <nda...@mac.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> I agree with Cos on fixing HDFS-1511 first. Once that is done I'll >>>> enable hdfs patch testing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>> Nige >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone4 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 17, 2010, at 7:01 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> One more issue needs to be addressed before test-patch is turned on >>>> HDFS is >>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-1511 >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Take care, >>>>>>>>> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 16:17, Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Considering that because of these 4 faulty cases every patch will >> be >>>>>>>>>> -1'ed a patch author will still have to look at it and make a >>>> comment >>>>>>>>>> why this particular -1 isn't valid. Lesser work, perhaps, but >>>> messier >>>>>>>>>> IMO. I'm not blocking it - I just feel like there's a better way. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Take care, >>>>>>>>>> Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 15:55, Jakob Homan <jgho...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> If HDFS is added to the test-patch queue right now we get >>>>>>>>>>>> nothing but dozens of -1'ed patches. >>>>>>>>>>> There aren't dozens of patches being submitted currently. The -1 >>>>>>>>>>> isn't the important thing, it's the grunt work of actually >> running >>>>>>>>>>> (and waiting) for the tests, test-patch, etc. that Hudson does so >>>> that >>>>>>>>>>> the developer doesn't have to. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Dhruba Borthakur < >>>> dhr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> +1, thanks for doing this. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Jakob Homan <jgho...@gmail.com >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> So, with test-patch updated to show the failing tests, saving >> the >>>>>>>>>>>>> developers the need to go and verify that the failed tests are >>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>>> known, how do people feel about turning on test-patch again for >>>> HDFS >>>>>>>>>>>>> and mapred? I think it'll help prevent any more tests from >>>> entering >>>>>>>>>>>>> the "yeah, we know" category. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> jg >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Jakob Homan < >>>> jho...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, each patch would get a -1 and the failing tests would >> need >>>> to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> verified as those known bad (BTW, it would be great if Hudson >>>> could list >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which tests failed in the message it posts to JIRA). But >> that's >>>> still >>>>>>>>>>>>> quite >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a bit less error-prone work than if the developer runs the >> tests >>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> test-patch themselves. Also, with 22 being cut, there are a >> lot >>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>> patches >>>>>>>>>>>>>> up in the air and several developers are juggling multiple >>>> patches. The >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more automation we can have, even if it's not perfect, will >>>> decrease >>>>>>>>>>>>> errors >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we may make. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -jg >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nigel Daley wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 17, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's also ready to run on MapReduce and HDFS but we won't >>>> turn it on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until these projects build and test cleanly. Looks like >> both >>>> these >>>>>>>>>>>>> projects >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> currently have test failures. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assuming the projects are compiling and building, is there a >>>> reason to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not turn it on despite the test failures? Hudson is >> invaluable >>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>> developers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> who then don't have to run the tests and test-patch >>>> themselves. We >>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn Hudson off when it was working previously and there >> were >>>> known >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failures. I think one of the reasons we have more failing >>>> tests now is >>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> higher cost of doing Hudson's work (not a great excuse I >>>> know). This >>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particularly true now because several of the failing tests >>>> involve >>>>>>>>>>>>> tests >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> timing out, making the whole testing regime even longer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Every single patch would get a -1 and need investigation. >>>> Currently, >>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be about 83 investigations between MR and HDFS issues >>>> that are in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch available state. Shouldn't we focus on getting these >>>> tests fixed >>>>>>>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed/? Also, I need to get MAPREDUCE-2172 fixed (applies >> to >>>> HDFS as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well) before I turn this on. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nige >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> Connect to me at http://www.facebook.com/dhruba >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Todd Lipcon >>> Software Engineer, Cloudera >> >> > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera
