On 7/8/20 8:33 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:20 AM Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 7:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is tr
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:20 AM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> On 7/5/20 7:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
> >>> what it is tr
I am avail to cut RCs when the fix goes in unless Phil wants to do it.
Gary
On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:20 AM Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> On 7/5/20 7:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The test l
On 7/5/20 7:08 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this mys
On 7/5/20 6:02 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run
On 7/5/20 11:07 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run two evictor cycles when it is set to wait
The test looks a little off to me. I am not sure I fully understand
what it is trying to do, but I suspect that the reason that it fails
sporadically (I have seen this myself) is that to succeed it needs to
run two evictor cycles when it is set to wait for only one. I may be
wrong as I don't
This must be some timing issue as the test passed on GitHub and Travis,
but, I do see one failure for that on Java 11 on GitHub.
I am guessing the test might need to be set up differently.
Gary
On Fri, Jul 3, 2020, 14:35 Robert Paschek
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> when I'm running mvn clean test on the
Hello,
when I'm running mvn clean test on the current master branch, testEvict always
fails with the same error.
[ERROR] Failures:
[ERROR] TestAbandonedBasicDataSource>TestBasicDataSource.testEvict:946
EvictionTimer thread was destroyed with numIdle=7(expected: less or equal than
5)
[ERROR]
