Filed an issue with INFRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-11773
@Robert: I agree, but still we see failing builds over and over again. At best it is annoying, at worst it "hides" new bugs being introduced. On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> wrote: > That is good to hear that we can so easily solve most of the failing > builds. We should then iterate over the open test-stability issues to see > whether they are still valid after we've merged PR 1915. > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I'm not sure if the issues is as big as it seems on a first sight. >> The reason why all the builds of master are red on travis is that the cache >> of the 5th build is invalid. We have to ask infra to delete the caches and >> then they'll be green again. >> >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > Along the lines of what Greg already mentioned, I would like to >> > re-iterate that Travis is often a problem too: >> > - long build times and we are reaching the time limit >> > - unreliable I/O >> > - unreliable resolving of build dependencies >> > >> > @Max: I think you wanted to look into whether we can use Apache's >> > Jenkins server for our builds instead of Travis. Did you ever get >> > around at looking into it? If yes: What's your opinion on replacing >> > Travis with Jenkins? Is it a viable option? Would it improve the >> > Travis-specific problems? >> > >> > On the other hand, the very slow Travis machines also helped >> > discovering some hard-to-catch race conditions. >> > >> > – Ufuk >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: >> > > We have also started running over Travis' 2 hour limit for the longest >> > build. >> > > >> > > Greg >> > > >> > > >> > >> On Apr 27, 2016, at 7:53 AM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Hi Till, >> > >> >> > >> thank you for bringing this up. We really need to fix this. >> > >> >> > >> Filing JIRAs with critical priority was how we tried to solve it in >> > >> the past, but obviously it did not work. There seems to be a mismatch >> > >> between assigned and actual priorities. >> > >> >> > >> As a first step, I would volunteer to gather a list of tests, which >> > >> have failed in the last weeks and make sure that we have JIRAs for >> > >> them. >> > >> >> > >> As a next step, we should coordinate how to resolve those issues >> > >> (maybe prioritized by failure frequency) to get master stable again. >> > >> >> > >> – Ufuk >> > >> >> > >> >> > >>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Till Rohrmann < >> trohrm...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >>> Hi Flink community, >> > >>> >> > >>> I just wanted to raise awareness that in the last 16 days there was >> > just a >> > >>> single Travis build of master which passed all tests. This indicates >> > that >> > >>> we have some serious problems with our test stability or even worse a >> > >>> problem with the master itself. Having an unstable master makes it >> > really >> > >>> hard to assess whether new changes actually broke something or >> whether >> > the >> > >>> failing test was unrelated. >> > >>> >> > >>> We have currently 37 open issues labeled with test-stability and most >> > of >> > >>> them have a critical priority. Therefore, I would propose that we try >> > to >> > >>> tackle them as soon as possible in order to improve our testing >> > stability. >> > >>> >> > >>> Cheers, >> > >>> Till >> > >>
