On 12/31/2013 3:58 PM, Michael Still wrote:
Hi.
So while turbo hipster is new, I've been reading every failure message
it produces to make sure its not too badly wrong. There were four
failures posted last night while I slept:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64521
============================
This one is a TH bug. We shouldn't be testing stable branches.
bug/1265238 has been filed to track this.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/61753
============================
This is your review. The failed run's log is
https://ssl.rcbops.com/turbo_hipster/logviewer/?q=/turbo_hipster/results/61/61753/8/check/gate-real-db-upgrade_nova_percona_user_001/1326092/user_001.log
and you can see from the failure message that migrations 152 and 206
took "too long".
Migration 152 took 326 seconds, where our historical data of 2,846
test migrations says it should take 222 seconds. Migration 206 took 81
seconds, where we think it should take 56 seconds based on 2,940 test
runs.
Whilst I can't explain why those migrations took too long this time
around, they are certainly exactly the sort of thing TH is meant to
catch. If you think your patch isn't responsible (perhaps the machine
is just being slow or something), you can always retest by leaving a
review comment of "recheck migrations". I have done this for you on
this patch.
Michael, is "recheck migrations" something that is going to be added to
the wiki for test failures here?
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GerritJenkinsGit#Test_Failures
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/61717
============================
This review also had similar unexplained slowness, but has already
been rechecked by someone else and now passes. I note that the
slowness in both cases was from the same TH worker node, and I will
keep an eye on that node today.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56420
============================
This review also had slowness in migration 206, but has been rechecked
by the developer and now passes. It wasn't on the percona-001 worker
that the other two were on, so perhaps this indicates that we need to
relax the timing requirements for migration 206.
Hope this helps,
Michael
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Gary Kotton <gkot...@vmware.com> wrote:
Hi,
It seems that she/he is behaving oddly again. I have posted a patch that
does not have any database changes and it has give me a –1….
Happy new year
Gary
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
