Ilya, can you check your test on current implementation [1]? [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5662
10 дек. 2018 г. 17:10 пользователь "Dmitriy Pavlov" <dpav...@apache.org> написал: Reverted. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-8227 reopened пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 16:23, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: > Anton, I was expecting that you revert, because you wanted to do it. > > Provided that I agree that fix could be reverted because of both > functional and style possible improvements, does not mean I believe it is > the only option and it should be reverted. > > Even if I agree to revert doesn't mean all community agrees, so reverting > just 1 minute after writing to dev list would be strange. I believe we > should be courteous enough to give a couple of days for people to come and > give feedback. > > So if you have a spare minute, please go ahead. If not, I can do it later. > > пн, 10 дек. 2018 г. в 14:23, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>: > >> Dmitriy, >> >> You confirmed that fix should be reverted and reworked last Friday. >> Why it still not reverted? >> >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:46 AM Dmitrii Ryabov <somefire...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Agree, it is reasonable to revert. >> > пт, 7 дек. 2018 г. в 18:44, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: >> > > >> > > Hi Ilya, >> > > >> > > thank you for noticing. >> > > >> > > Calling to fail is equal to re-throw, >> > > >> > > throw new AssertionFailedError(message); >> > > >> > > So, yes, for now it is absolutely valid reason to revert and rework >> fix >> > > >> > > - as Nikolay suggested to reduce method override ocurrences. >> > > - and with transferring this exception into GridAbstractTest and >> > > correctly failing test. >> > > >> > > Sincerely, >> > > Dmitriy Pavlov >> > > >> > > >> > > пт, 7 дек. 2018 г. в 18:38, Ilya Lantukh <ilant...@gridgain.com>: >> > > >> > > > Unfortunately, this FailureHandler doesn't seem to work. I wrote a >> test >> > > > that reproduces a bug and should fail. It prints the following text >> > into >> > > > log, but the test still passes "successfully": >> > > > >> > > > [2018-12-07 >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> 18:28:23,800][ERROR][sys-stripe-1-#345%recovery.GridPointInTimeRecoveryCacheNoAffinityExchangeTest1%][IgniteTestResources] >> > > > Critical system error detected. Will be handled accordingly to >> > configured >> > > > handler [hnd=TestFailingFailureHandler [], failureCtx=FailureContext >> > > > [type=CRITICAL_ERROR, err=java.lang.IllegalStateException: Unable to >> > find >> > > > consistentId by UUID [nodeId=80dd2ec6-1913-4a5c-a839-630315c00003, >> > > > topVer=AffinityTopologyVersion [topVer=12, minorTopVer=0]]]] >> > > > java.lang.IllegalStateException: Unable to find consistentId by UUID >> > > > [nodeId=80dd2ec6-1913-4a5c-a839-630315c00003, >> > > > topVer=AffinityTopologyVersion [topVer=12, minorTopVer=0]] >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.discovery.ConsistentIdMapper.mapToCompactId(ConsistentIdMapper.java:62) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.discovery.ConsistentIdMapper.mapToCompactIds(ConsistentIdMapper.java:123) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxManager.newTxRecord(IgniteTxManager.java:2507) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxManager.logTxRecord(IgniteTxManager.java:2483) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxAdapter.state(IgniteTxAdapter.java:1226) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxAdapter.state(IgniteTxAdapter.java:1054) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.startRemoteTx(IgniteTxHandler.java:1836) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.processDhtTxPrepareRequest(IgniteTxHandler.java:1180) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler.access$400(IgniteTxHandler.java:118) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler$5.apply(IgniteTxHandler.java:222) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.transactions.IgniteTxHandler$5.apply(IgniteTxHandler.java:220) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.processMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:1059) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.onMessage0(GridCacheIoManager.java:584) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.handleMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:383) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.handleMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:309) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager.access$100(GridCacheIoManager.java:100) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.processors.cache.GridCacheIoManager$1.onMessage(GridCacheIoManager.java:299) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.invokeListener(GridIoManager.java:1568) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.processRegularMessage0(GridIoManager.java:1196) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager.access$4200(GridIoManager.java:127) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.managers.communication.GridIoManager$9.run(GridIoManager.java:1092) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.util.StripedExecutor$Stripe.body(StripedExecutor.java:505) >> > > > at >> > > > >> > >> org.apache.ignite.internal.util.worker.GridWorker.run(GridWorker.java:120) >> > > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 4:01 PM Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > >> We stop, for now, then you will chill a >> > > > > >> little bit, then you will have an absolutely fantastic weekend, >> > and >> > > > then >> > > > > on >> > > > > >> Monday, Dec 10 we will continue this discussion in a positive >> and >> > > > > >> constructive manner. >> > > > > Agree >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 3:55 PM Nikolay Izhikov < >> nizhi...@apache.org> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Anton. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I discussed this fix privately with Dmitriy Pavlov. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 1. We had NoOpHandler for ALL tests before this merge. >> > > > > > 2. Dmitry Ryabov will remove all copypasted code soon. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > So, this fix make things better. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I think we shouldn't revert it. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I think we should continue work to turn off NoOpHandler in all >> > tests. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov, can you do it, as a committer of this patch? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On 12/6/18 3:02 PM, Anton Vinogradov wrote: >> > > > > > >>> I still hope Anton will do the first bunch of tests >> research to >> > > > > > > demonstrate >> > > > > > >>> the idea. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dmitriy, >> > > > > > > Just want to remind you that we already spend time here >> because >> > of >> > > > > > > unacceptable code merge situation. >> > > > > > > Such merges should NEVER happen again. >> > > > > > > Please, next time make sure that code you merge has no massive >> > > > > > duplication >> > > > > > > and fixes without proper reason investigation. >> > > > > > > Committer always MUST be ready to explain each symbol inside >> > code he >> > > > > > merged. >> > > > > > > The situation when you have no clue why it written this way >> > > > > unacceptable. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Feel free to start a discussion at private in case you have >> some >> > > > > > objections. >> > > > > > > But, hope you agree and will help us to solve the issue >> instead. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Dmitrii, >> > > > > > >>> Anton, I mean `copy-paste reduce` ticket. I'll try to >> describe >> > the >> > > > > > > reasons for >> > > > > > >>> no-op in tests. Then, we can create tickets to fix this >> cases >> > if >> > > > > > needed. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In case no-one will be ready to start a proper fix >> (investigate >> > why >> > > > > every >> > > > > > > no-op required and create tickets for each problem) before >> Friday >> > > > > > evening, >> > > > > > > the code will be rolled back. >> > > > > > > Simple no-op is better that same but overcomplicated. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 2:14 PM Dmitrii Ryabov < >> > somefire...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Anton, I mean `copy-paste reduce` ticket. I'll try to >> describe >> > > > reasons >> > > > > > for >> > > > > > >> no-op in tests. Then, we can create tickets to fix this >> cases if >> > > > > needed. >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г., 13:53 Dmitriy Pavlov dpav...@apache.org: >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >>> BTW, No-Op or StopNode-FailTest in case of a deep >> investigation >> > > > will >> > > > > > >> always >> > > > > > >>> require to understand what test does and what it tests. >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> So we can get a positive outcome from this research if we >> > agree to >> > > > > add >> > > > > > >>> - a small description to each test about the reason for >> > existing of >> > > > > > this >> > > > > > >>> test, >> > > > > > >>> - what is the expected behavior of the product in the test, >> > and how >> > > > > it >> > > > > > is >> > > > > > >>> checked? >> > > > > > >>> - failure handler influence, etc. >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> I still hope Anton will do the first bunch of tests >> research to >> > > > > > >> demonstrate >> > > > > > >>> the idea. >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 13:39, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org >> >: >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>>> Dmitrii, >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> I agree with Nikolay's solution. If no one minds, I'll >> > create >> > > > > ticket >> > > > > > >>> for >> > > > > > >>>>>> appropriate changes and recheck issues. >> > > > > > >>>> Do you mean 'copy-paste reduce' ticket or check/fix of all >> > tests >> > > > > with >> > > > > > >>> no-op >> > > > > > >>>> to have a proper handler? >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> Just want to make sure that copy-paste minimization is not >> the >> > > > final >> > > > > > >>> step. >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 1:24 PM Павлухин Иван < >> > vololo...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> Dmitrii Ryabov, >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> Your comments sounds reasonable to me. Marker base class >> > approach >> > > > > > >>>>> looks good to me so far. >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> P.S. I had even worse name in mind 'StopGaps' =) >> > > > > > >>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 13:08, Dmitrii Ryabov < >> > > > somefire...@gmail.com >> > > > > >: >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Ivan, I think `Workarounds` class isn't good idea, >> because >> > it >> > > > > looks >> > > > > > >>>> like >> > > > > > >>>>> we >> > > > > > >>>>>> create stable workarounds, which will never be fixed. >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> I agree with Nikolay's solution. If no one minds, I'll >> > create >> > > > > > >> ticket >> > > > > > >>>> for >> > > > > > >>>>>> appropriate changes and recheck issues. >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г., 12:17 Anton Vinogradov a...@apache.org >> : >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Folks, thank's everyone for solution research. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> I'm ok with Nikolay approach in case that's not a final >> > step. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 12:11 PM Павлухин Иван < >> > > > > > >> vololo...@gmail.com >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Nikolay, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I meant "not expensive" by "cheap". And I meant that >> it is >> > > > good >> > > > > > >>>> that >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> it cheap =). And I said it to contrast with "expensive" >> > ~100 >> > > > > > >>> tests >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> investigation. And if we agree (mostly I would like an >> > opinion >> > > > > > >>> from >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Dmitriy Ryabov as an original author) on a way how to >> > improve >> > > > > > >> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> patch then let's do it. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 10:41, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > > >> nizhi...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Dmitriy Ryabov, Dmitriy Pavlov, sorry. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Of course it should be "NOT to blame author". >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Sorry, one more time. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г., 10:40 Dmitriy Pavlov >> > dpav...@apache.org: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I hope you've misprinted here >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm here to blame the author. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> We can blame code but never coders. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Please see https://discourse.pi-hole.net/faq - has >> > > > > > >>> absolutely >> > > > > > >>>>>>> nothing >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> in >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> common with Apache Guides, but says the same things. >> It >> > is >> > > > > > >> a >> > > > > > >>>>>>> practical >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> necessity to maintain a friendly atmosphere. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> чт, 6 дек. 2018 г. в 10:31, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > > >>>> nizhi...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Ivan. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Accept the patch and bring an improvement to >> Ignite >> > > > > > >>> (and >> > > > > > >>>>>>> create >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> a> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ticket for further investigation). >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I support this idea. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Do we create the tickets already? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nikolay's patch [1] suggests a slightly different >> > > > > > >>> approach >> > > > > > >>>>> how to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> same thing. And implementing that idea looks like a >> > > > > > >> cheap >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> refactoring. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I don't agree with your term "cheap". >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Do you think reducing copy paste code not worth it? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I see a hundreds issues that bring copypasted code >> in >> > the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> product(Ignite >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and others). >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I insist, that we shouldn't accept patches with it. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm here to blame the author. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I want to improve this patch and make it easier to >> find >> > > > > > >> all >> > > > > > >>>>> places >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> with >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> NoOp handler to do the further investigation. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> В Чт, 06/12/2018 в 10:19 +0300, Павлухин Иван пишет: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Guys, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I asked what harm will applying the patch bring I >> have >> > > > > > >>> not >> > > > > > >>>>> got a >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> direct answer. But I think I got some pain points: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Anton does not like that reasons why ~100 tests >> > > > > > >>> require >> > > > > > >>>>> noop >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> handler are not clear. And might be several >> problems >> > > > > > >> are >> > > > > > >>>>> covered >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> there. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Nikolay suggests some code improvements. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nikolay's patch [1] suggests a slightly different >> > > > > > >>> approach >> > > > > > >>>>> how to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> same thing. And implementing that idea looks like a >> > > > > > >> cheap >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> refactoring. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> But the idea of course could be discussed. Straight >> > > > > > >> away >> > > > > > >>> I >> > > > > > >>>>> can >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> suggest >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> another slightly different trick [2]. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Investigating why ~100 tests require noop handler >> > could >> > > > > > >>> be >> > > > > > >>>>>>> costly. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> So, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in that direction I see following options which can >> > > > > > >>> happen >> > > > > > >>>>> for >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> sure: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Accept the patch and bring an improvement to >> Ignite >> > > > > > >>> (and >> > > > > > >>>>>>> create >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> a >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ticket for further investigation). >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Revert the patch and loose an improvement. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> One might say that there is an option "Revert the >> > patch >> > > > > > >>> and >> > > > > > >>>>> then >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> do it >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> better" but I does not see anything (anyone) what >> can >> > > > > > >>>>> guarantee >> > > > > > >>>>>>> it. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> So, I personally prefer an option 1 against 2 >> because >> > I >> > > > > > >>>>> believe >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> that >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> it is good if the system "can make a progress". >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5584/files >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5586/files >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 21:22, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > > >>>>> nizhi...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The closest analog to Noop handler is mute of >> test >> > > > > > >>>>> failure. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> By this commit, we had unmuted (possible) >> failures >> > > > > > >> in >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> ~50000-~100=~49900 >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> tests, and we’re still concerned about style or >> minor >> > > > > > >>>>> details >> > > > > > >>>>>>> if >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> no-op >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> was >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> copy-pasted, aren’t we? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you explain this idea a bit more? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't understand what is unmuted by discussed >> > > > > > >> commit. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 20:40, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, as an improvement to the code, this may >> > > > > > >> be >> > > > > > >>>>> better. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can prepare a full patch for NoOp handler. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton Vinogradov, do you agree with this >> approach? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 20:33, Dmitriy Pavlov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, as an improvement to the code, this may >> > > > > > >> be >> > > > > > >>>>> better. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> But >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> still, it >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not a reason to revert. And Anton mentioned >> > > > > > >>> something >> > > > > > >>>>> with >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> better >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exception >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handling/logging. Probably we will see an >> > > > > > >>>>> implementation as >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> well. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This case here is a big thing related to The >> > > > > > >> Apache >> > > > > > >>>>> Way, - >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> and >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I'll >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why it makes me switched into fight-mode - until >> > > > > > >> we >> > > > > > >>>>> stop >> > > > > > >>>>>>> this >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> nonsense. If >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PMCs (at least) are aware of patterns and >> > > > > > >>>>> anti-patterns in >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> community, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we will succeed as a project much more as with >> > > > > > >>> (only) >> > > > > > >>>>>>> perfect >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> code. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The closest analog to Noop handler is mute of >> > > > > > >> test >> > > > > > >>>>> failure. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> By >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> this >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commit, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we had unmuted (possible) failures in >> > > > > > >>>>> ~50000-~100=~49900 >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> tests, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and we’re >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still concerned about style or minor details if >> > > > > > >>> no-op >> > > > > > >>>>> was >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> copy-pasted, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren’t we? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To everyone arguing about the number of tests we >> > > > > > >>> are >> > > > > > >>>>>>> allowed >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> have with >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op: please visit this page >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&tab=mutedProblems&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=__all_branches__ >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It says: Muted tests: 3154. Are there any >> > > > > > >>>> disagreements >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> here? Why >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> there >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no insistent disagreement/not happy PMCs with >> > > > > > >>>>> absolutely >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> unconditionally >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> muted failures? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any reason now to continue the discussion about >> > > > > > >>>>> reverting >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> absolutely >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> positive contribution into product stability >> from >> > > > > > >>>>> Dmitrii >> > > > > > >>>>>>> R.? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Moreover, Dmitrii Ryabov is trying to solve odd >> > > > > > >>> mutes >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> problem, as >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> well, to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> locate mutes with links resolved issues in the >> TC >> > > > > > >>>> Bot. >> > > > > > >>>>> Is >> > > > > > >>>>>>> he >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> deserved to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> read denouncing comments about the contribution? >> > > > > > >> I >> > > > > > >>>>> guess, >> > > > > > >>>>>>> no, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> especially >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the commenter is not going to help/contribute a >> > > > > > >>>> better >> > > > > > >>>>> fix. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is now a paramount thing for me if people >> in >> > > > > > >>>> this >> > > > > > >>>>>>> thread >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> will >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> join >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process or not. People may be not happy with >> some >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> decisions/code/style, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some people are more often unhappy than others. >> > > > > > >>> More >> > > > > > >>>>> you >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> contribute,- more >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you can decide. If you don't contribute at all - >> > > > > > >> I >> > > > > > >>>>> don't >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> care too >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> much >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about just opinions, I can accept facts. To >> > > > > > >> provide >> > > > > > >>>>> facts >> > > > > > >>>>>>> we >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> need >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to do >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deep research, how can someone know if the test >> > > > > > >>>> should >> > > > > > >>>>> be >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> no-op >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> or >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> not >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without deep analysis? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, if someone comes to list and provide just >> > > > > > >>>>> negative >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> feedback, people >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will stop writing here. Probably no-op was >> > > > > > >> enabled >> > > > > > >>>>> without >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> proper >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion because of this, someone may be >> afraid >> > > > > > >>> of >> > > > > > >>>>>>> sharing >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> this. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Result: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some of us knew it only now. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you need to make Ignite quite toxic place to >> > > > > > >>> have >> > > > > > >>>> an >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> absolutely >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> perfect >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code with just a few of arguing-resistant >> > > > > > >>>>> contributors? I >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> believe >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> not, and >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you don't need to be reminded 'community first >> > > > > > >>>>> principle'. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 19:43, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should avoid copy paste code instead >> > > > > > >>> of >> > > > > > >>>>>>> thinking >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> about Apache >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Way all the time :) >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, I propose to return to the code! >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should use some kind of marker base >> > > > > > >>>> class >> > > > > > >>>>> for >> > > > > > >>>>>>> a >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> cases >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> with >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> NoOpHandler. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This has several advantages, comparing with >> > > > > > >>> current >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> implementation: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. No copy paste code >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Reduce changes. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. All usages of NoOpHandler can be easily >> > > > > > >> found >> > > > > > >>>>> with IDE >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> or >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> grep >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> search. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've prepared proof of concept pull request to >> > > > > > >>>>>>> demonstrate >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> my >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> approach >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can go further and prepare full fix. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >> > > > > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/5584/files >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 18:29, Dmitriy Pavlov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Folks, let me explain one thing which is not >> > > > > > >>>>> related >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> much to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> fix >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> itself, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but it is more about how we interact. If >> > > > > > >>> someone >> > > > > > >>>>> will >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> just >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> come to the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and say it is not good commit, it is a silly >> > > > > > >>>>> solution >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> and say >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> others >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rework these patches - it is a road to >> > > > > > >> nowhere. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If someone sees the potential to make things >> > > > > > >>>>> better he >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> or she >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> suggest >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or commits patch). This is named do-ocracy, >> > > > > > >>>> those >> > > > > > >>>>> who >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> do can >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> make a >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decision. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And this topic it is a perfect example of how >> > > > > > >>>>> do-ocracy >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> should >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> (and >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not) work. We have a potentially hidden >> > > > > > >> problem >> > > > > > >>>>> (we had >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> it >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> before >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> R. commit), I believe 3 or 7 tests may be >> > > > > > >> found >> > > > > > >>>>> after >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> re-checks of >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Eventually, these tests will get their >> > > > > > >>> stop-node >> > > > > > >>>>>>> handler >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> after >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> revisiting >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op test list. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have ~100 tests and several people who >> > > > > > >> care. >> > > > > > >>>>> Anton, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Andrew, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitrii & >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy, Nikolay, probably Ed, and we have >> > > > > > >>> 100/6 >> > > > > > >>>> = >> > > > > > >>>>> 18 >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> tests >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> double >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for each contributor. We can make things >> > > > > > >> better >> > > > > > >>>> if >> > > > > > >>>>> we >> > > > > > >>>>>>> go >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> together. And >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is how a community works. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If someone just come to list to criticize and >> > > > > > >>>>> enforces >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> someone >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> else >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all things, he or she probably don't want to >> > > > > > >>>>> improve >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> project >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> code but >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other goals. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 18:08, Andrey Kuznetsov >> > > > > > >> < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> stku...@gmail.com>: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I can see from the above discussion, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tests in these classes check fail cases >> > > > > > >>> when >> > > > > > >>>>> we >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> expect >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> critical >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like node stop or exception thrown >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, this copy-n-paste-style change is >> > > > > > >> caused >> > > > > > >>> by >> > > > > > >>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> imperfect logic >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing tests, that should be reworked in >> > > > > > >>> more >> > > > > > >>>>>>> robust >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> way, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> e.g. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> custom failure handlers. Dmitrii just >> > > > > > >>> revealed >> > > > > > >>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> existing >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> flaws, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMO. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 17:54, Nikolay >> > > > > > >> Izhikov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org>: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Igniters. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm agree with Anton Vinogradov. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should avoid commits like [1] >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Copy paste coding style is well known >> > > > > > >> anti >> > > > > > >>>>> pattern. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't we have another option to do same >> > > > > > >> fix >> > > > > > >>>>> with >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> better >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> styling? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Accepting such patches leads to the >> > > > > > >> further >> > > > > > >>>>> tickets >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> cleanup >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mess >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patches brings to the code base. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Example of cleanup [2] >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's take a significant amount of my and >> > > > > > >>>> Maxim >> > > > > > >>>>> time >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> made and >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cleanup patch. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We shouldn't accept patch with copy paste >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> "improvements". >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I really like your perfectionism >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's not about perfectionism it's about >> > > > > > >>>> keeping >> > > > > > >>>>>>> code >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> base >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> clean. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I'm going to rollback changes in >> > > > > > >> case >> > > > > > >>>>>>> arguments >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> will >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> not be >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provided. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to rollback and rework this commit. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At least, we should reduce copy paste >> > > > > > >> code. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/b94a3c2fe3a272a31fad62b80505d16f87eab2dd >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/eb8038f65285559c5424eba2882b0de0583ea7af >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г. в 17:28, Anton >> > > > > > >>> Vinogradov >> > > > > > >>>> < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org>: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrey, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But why should we make all things >> > > > > > >>>> perfect >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a single fix? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I said, I'm ok in case someone ready >> > > > > > >>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> continue :) >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, we should avoid such >> > > > > > >>> over-copy-pasted >> > > > > > >>>>>>> commits >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> in >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:13 PM Andrey >> > > > > > >>>>> Mashenkov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have TC run results for the PR >> > > > > > >>>> before >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> massive >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> failure >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handler >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallbacks were added? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's create a ticket to investigate >> > > > > > >>>>>>> possibility >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> of >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> using any >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaningful >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure handler for such tests with >> > > > > > >> TC >> > > > > > >>>>> report >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> attached. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:41 PM Anton >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Vinogradov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's ok in case someone ready to do >> > > > > > >>>> this >> > > > > > >>>>> (get >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> rid >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> of >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> all >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no-op >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> why it's a better choice). >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Explicit confirmation required. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Otherwise, only rollback is an >> > > > > > >>> option. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:29 PM >> > > > > > >>> Dmitriy >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Pavlov < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dpav...@apache.org> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anton, if you care enough here >> > > > > > >> will >> > > > > > >>>>> you try >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> research a >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couple >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests? Or you are asking others >> > > > > > >> to >> > > > > > >>> do >> > > > > > >>>>>>> things >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> for >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> you, >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like idea from Andrew to create >> > > > > > >>>>> ticket >> > > > > > >>>>>>> and >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> check >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> these >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> keep >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moving towards 0....10 tests with >> > > > > > >>>>> noop. It >> > > > > > >>>>>>> is >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> easy >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> to >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> locate >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overridden method now. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So threat this change as >> > > > > > >>> contributed >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> mechanism >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> for >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> failing >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests. >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for you? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ср, 5 дек. 2018 г., 15:59 Anton >> > > > > > >>>>> Vinogradov >> > > > > > >>>>>>> < >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> a...@apache.org >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't get. What is the >> > > > > > >>>>> problem in >> > > > > > >>>>>>>> saving >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> No-Op for >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> several >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tests? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should we keep No-Op for >> > > > > > >> all? >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Several (less than 10) is ok to >> > > > > > >>> me >> > > > > > >>>>> with >> > > > > > >>>>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> proper >> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
