Hi Murray,

thanks for looking into it :-)

My findings so far: Lucene index related test are already in the main
build, so that part should be covered, and regarding the Tika-related ones,
they don't interact with Lucene, they only parse a couple of files, and
check the extracted information (which is afterwards sent to Lucene, but
that's outside the scope of the test). I was suspecting of something weird
on the node in which the build kept running and made a new Jenkins job to
do some tests (and avoid spamming dev@j.a.o) at
https://builds.apache.org/job/jspwiki-test/

Funnily now I'm getting 7 test failures on jspwiki-main, from tests long
untouched, on:
* CommandResolverTest.java:59
* PageCommandTest.java:53

Both lines perform the same action: TestEngine.deletePage(..), so I'm
testing other nodes right now, because it seems I get different exceptions
on different nodes. Also, maybe unrelated, but given that the maven build
is running with -up, the jacoco plugin should always be 0.8.3 (the latest
one), but I get different versions on different nodes, which makes me
suspect of the environment.. In any case, I'm still digging..


best regards,
juan pablo

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 12:49 AM Murray Altheim <murra...@altheim.com> wrote:

> Hi Juan Pablo,
>
> I'll possibly be able to look into this early this work week, but my
> suspicion is that Lucene itself is having trouble being instantiated.
> As we already have Lucene in the mix, you'll have to be sure that
> both Lucene engines are the same version and that you can actually
> create both an Indexer and a Finder. I'd suggest creating a unit
> test that does that, then tries to create both JSPWiki's normal
> search provider, then in the same test try creating the Tika version.
> If that works generally you'd be good to go.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Murray
>
> On 5/05/19 10:14 AM, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > latest commits on master brought a TikaSearchProvider, contributed by Ulf
> > Dittmer (JSPWIKI-469). I've added some tests to it, but somehow I'm not
> > getting them passing at builds.apache.org. Given that I've been able to
> > deploy a snapshot from my local pc, with those tests successfully
> running,
> > I'm a bit blind on what is happening at builds.a.o. At first I thought
> > there were some concurrency issues which prevented the test from running
> at
> > builds.a.o, but right now the offending test really unit tests, and
> doesn't
> > rely on background threads finishing indexing attachment on time.
> >
> > More specifically, current build failure yields:
> >
> > [ERROR] testGetAttachmentContent  Time elapsed: 5.163 s  <<< ERROR!
> > java.lang.NullPointerException
> >       at
> org.apache.wiki.search.tika.TikaSearchProviderTest.testGetAttachmentContent(TikaSearchProviderTest.java:58)
> >
> > with line 58 on TikaSearchProviderTest being:
> > String pdfIndexed = tsp.getAttachmentContent( attPdf );
> >
> > So tsp is the only thing there capable of throwing a NPE. However, tsp is
> > obtained as:
> > TikaSearchProvider tsp = ( TikaSearchProvider
> > )engine.getSearchManager().getSearchEngine();
> >
> > and the execution log shows that tsp can't be null:
> >
> > 2019-05-04 20:59:01,355 [main] DEBUG
> > org.apache.wiki.search.SearchManager  - Loaded search provider
> > org.apache.wiki.search.tika.TikaSearchProvider@7a63c618
> >
> > so, what I'm missing? can anyone reproduce that NPE?? I could change the
> > test so tsp gets instantiated and set up manually but that seems
> > cumbersome, and shouldn't be needed
> >
> >
> > thx in advance,
> > juan pablo
> >
>
> --
>
> ...........................................................................
> Murray Altheim <murray18 at altheim dot com>                       = =  ===
> http://www.altheim.com/murray/                                     ===
> ===
>                                                                     = =
> ===
>      In the evening
>      The rice leaves in the garden
>      Rustle in the autumn wind
>      That blows through my reed hut.
>             -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu
>
>

Reply via email to