Hi Vyacheslav, I've raised 1 concern and several questions in https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-509
Could you please address? Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov чт, 15 мар. 2018 г. в 13:30, Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com>: > Dmitry, I'm looking forward to the news. > > Thanks in advance! > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 1:10 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I would like to take a look to code now, if you don't mind. > > > > But I need to check if there is critical bug introduced to Ignite by my > > recent fix. So I need some time to research bug, and then can come back > to > > review. > > > > чт, 15 мар. 2018 г. в 13:04, Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com>: > >> > >> So, what's the next step? > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:27 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Yes, I think I could move IgniteReproducingSuite to dev-utils module > >> > later. > >> > Thank you for this idea. > >> > > >> > Yes, It is probably it was Queries test flaky'ness. > >> > > >> > I hope Vladimir, you will find some time to make query tests more > >> > stable. It > >> > is not friendly to community members if their patches are rejected by > >> > reasons not related to their change. > >> > > >> > Any assistance from the rest of community here is also appreciated. > >> > > >> > ср, 14 мар. 2018 г. в 22:24, Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com > >: > >> >> > >> >> Thank you for the advice! > >> >> > >> >> Unfortunately, *IgniteReproducingSuite* is in the core module while > >> >> *IgniteSqlSplitterSelfTest* in the ignite-indexing module that means > I > >> >> am not able to add the test in this test suite without addition > >> >> cycling dependency. > >> >> > >> >> I'd recommend you detaching *IgniteReproducingSuite* as a separate > >> >> module in the project to include the test suites from any module in > >> >> the project. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> But I've prepared *Ignite Queries* in the same way as you suggested > in > >> >> *IgniteReproducingSuite* [1] and ran all tests in > >> >> *IgniteSqlSplitterSelfTest* 100 times [2]. > >> >> > >> >> >> IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > IgniteSqlSplitterSelfTest.testReplicatedTablesUsingPartitionedCacheSegmentedClient > >> >> >> (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> For this test "Green lite" 100 times of 100. > >> >> > >> >> Green lite for all tests in *IgniteSqlSplitterSelfTest* in the latest > >> >> build of main PR [3]. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> [1] > >> >> > >> >> > https://github.com/daradurvs/ignite/blob/fd6abc915838599c2ebab3f803f90f2e641e8892/modules/indexing/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/testsuites/IgniteCacheQuerySelfTestSuite.java > >> >> [2] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1136780 > >> >> [3] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1136685 > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Dmitry Pavlov < > dpavlov....@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > It is possible that test is failing only on agents and is always > >> >> > successfull > >> >> > locally. > >> >> > > >> >> > For researching such test there was "Ignite reproducing suite" > >> >> > introduced > >> >> > early. This suite intentionally left blank on TC. Correspondent > suite > >> >> > in > >> >> > code is IgniteReproducingSuite. > >> >> > > >> >> > You may add some extra debug info into test. Add this test in > >> >> > IgniteReproducingSuite in code and then start suite on TC several > >> >> > times. > >> >> > > >> >> > ср, 14 мар. 2018 г. в 19:42, Vyacheslav Daradur > >> >> > <daradu...@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Dmitry, as I've written here before: I checked this test locally, > >> >> >> many > >> >> >> times (didn't have any falling on 100 starts). > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:31 PM, Dmitry Pavlov > >> >> >> <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > >> >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > Hi, I've found test which never failed on master, but fails in > >> >> >> > branch > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Ignite Queries [ tests 1 ] > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > IgniteBinaryCacheQueryTestSuite: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > IgniteSqlSplitterSelfTest.testReplicatedTablesUsingPartitionedCacheSegmentedClient > >> >> >> > (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > ср, 14 мар. 2018 г. в 19:26, Dmitry Pavlov > >> >> >> > <dpavlov....@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Hi, let me check TC run > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> вт, 13 мар. 2018 г. в 9:22, Vyacheslav Daradur > >> >> >> >> <daradu...@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> Dmitry, > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> Nickolay accepted PR changes at Upsource [1]. > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> Latest ci.build [2] looks good in comparison with master [3]. > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> Following tests passed locally: > >> >> >> >>> > CacheAffinityCallSelfTest.testAffinityCallFromClientRestartNode > >> >> >> >>> CacheAffinityCallSelfTest.testAffinityCallRestartNode > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > IgniteOptimisticTxSuspendResumeMultiServerTest.testTxTimeoutOnSuspend > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > IgniteSqlSplitterSelfTest.testReplicatedTablesUsingPartitionedCacheSegmentedClient > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> [1] > https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-509 > >> >> >> >>> [2] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1134466 > >> >> >> >>> [3] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1134372 > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > >> >> >> >>> <daradu...@gmail.com> > >> >> >> >>> wrote: > >> >> >> >>> > Dmitry, I saw them, but it looks like just randomness. > >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > I've checked it locally several times. > >> >> >> >>> > They failed only in one TeamCity's build of four. > >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > Started build once again to be sure. > >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 6:59 PM, Dmitry Pavlov > >> >> >> >>> > <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > >> >> >> >>> > wrote: > >> >> >> >>> >> I can see Nikolay Izhikov as reviewer in Upsource. > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> Nikolay, would you run review first? > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> I've found several suspicious tests : Test fail rate is > less > >> >> >> >>> >> than > >> >> >> >>> >> 1%, > >> >> >> >>> >> it is > >> >> >> >>> >> probably new failure > >> >> >> >>> >> IgniteCacheTestSuite2: > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > GridCachePartitionedTxSingleThreadedSelfTest.testOptimisticReadCommittedRollback > >> >> >> >>> >> (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> >> >>> >> IgniteCacheTestSuite2: > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > GridCachePartitionedTxSingleThreadedSelfTest.testOptimisticRepeatableReadRollback > >> >> >> >>> >> (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> >> >>> >> IgniteCacheTestSuite2: > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > GridCachePartitionedTxSingleThreadedSelfTest.testPessimisticReadCommittedCommit > >> >> >> >>> >> (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> >> >>> >> IgniteCacheTestSuite2: > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > GridCachePartitionedTxSingleThreadedSelfTest.testPessimisticReadCommittedRollback > >> >> >> >>> >> (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> >> >>> >> IgniteCacheTestSuite2: > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > GridCachePartitionedTxSingleThreadedSelfTest.testPessimisticSerializableCommit > >> >> >> >>> >> (fail rate 0,0%) > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> Vyacheslav, could you please check if these failures are > >> >> >> >>> >> related > >> >> >> >>> >> to > >> >> >> >>> >> the new > >> >> >> >>> >> changes? > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >> пн, 5 мар. 2018 г. в 18:50, Vyacheslav Daradur > >> >> >> >>> >> <daradu...@gmail.com>: > >> >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >> >>> >>> I've done some test-builds iteration on the weekends. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> Tests [1] look well. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> Does anyone have time to do the final review [2][3] and > >> >> >> >>> >>> merge > >> >> >> >>> >>> it? > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> [1] > >> >> >> >>> >>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1125676 > >> >> >> >>> >>> [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3578 > >> >> >> >>> >>> [3] > >> >> >> >>> >>> > https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-509 > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 10:17 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur > >> >> >> >>> >>> <daradu...@gmail.com> > >> >> >> >>> >>> wrote: > >> >> >> >>> >>> > Hi, Igniters! > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > This task [1] is about 'get' requests distribution > between > >> >> >> >>> >>> > primary > >> >> >> >>> >>> > and > >> >> >> >>> >>> > backup nodes in the replicated cache if 'readFromBackup' > >> >> >> >>> >>> > flag > >> >> >> >>> >>> > is > >> >> >> >>> >>> > enabled. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > I've prepared a solution [2] suggested by Alexei > >> >> >> >>> >>> > Scherbakov > >> >> >> >>> >>> > in > >> >> >> >>> >>> > Jira > >> >> >> >>> >>> > comments. It passed prereviews by Alexei and Nikolay > >> >> >> >>> >>> > Izhikov. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > TeamCity tests look similar with the master branch. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > Could someone of core module maintainers do the final > >> >> >> >>> >>> > review > >> >> >> >>> >>> > [2][3]? > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5357 > >> >> >> >>> >>> > [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3578 > >> >> >> >>> >>> > [3] > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-509 > >> >> >> >>> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> >>> > -- > >> >> >> >>> >>> > Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> >>> -- > >> >> >> >>> >>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > >> >> >> >>> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> >>> > -- > >> >> >> >>> > Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> > >> >> >> >>> -- > >> >> >> >>> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> -- > >> >> >> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. > > > > -- > Best Regards, Vyacheslav D. >
