I've also seen the BufferSpillerTest fail:
https://travis-ci.org/apache/flink/jobs/74057503
On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 at 14:10 Robert Metzger wrote:
> I've assigned https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1680 to myself.
> Maybe Tachyon 0.7 will fix the issues.
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:57 PM,
I've assigned https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-1680 to myself.
Maybe Tachyon 0.7 will fix the issues.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:57 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote:
> Yes.
>
> We should know, though, whether this is a Java 6 bug, or a bug in our
> system that just happens to occur only with Java
Yes.
We should know, though, whether this is a Java 6 bug, or a bug in our
system that just happens to occur only with Java 6 (because of different
timings in this other engine)
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Chesnay Schepler <
chesnay.schep...@fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Aren't we dropping java 6
Aren't we dropping java 6 support?
On 04.08.2015 12:21, Stephan Ewen wrote:
The "StateCheckpointedITCase" has not failed so far, which also test these
guarantees thoroughly.
But we need to first rule out the BarrierBuffer. The problem is that the
bug occur only on Java 6 and cannot be reproduce
The "StateCheckpointedITCase" has not failed so far, which also test these
guarantees thoroughly.
But we need to first rule out the BarrierBuffer. The problem is that the
bug occur only on Java 6 and cannot be reproduced locally...
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Gyula Fóra wrote:
> Honestly I
Honestly I don't think the partitioned state changes have anything to do
with the stability, only the reworked test case, which now test proper
exactly-once which was missing before.
Stephan Ewen ezt írta (időpont: 2015. aug. 4., K, 12:12):
> Yes, the build stability is super serious right now.
Yes, the build stability is super serious right now.
Here are the problems in question, and what we could do about this:
BarrierBuffer:
Barrier Buffer tests fail in Java 6 builds.
I have not found a way to diagnose that problem, yet, but if we cannot find
the issue today,
I've also seen this fail: https://travis-ci.org/apache/flink/jobs/74025862
in SuccessAfterNetworkBuffersFailureITCase
Build seems quite flaky recently.
On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 at 10:27 Matthias J. Sax
wrote:
> Rebased on:
>
>
> https://github.com/mjsax/flink/commit/fab61a1954ff1554448e826e1d273689e
Rebased on:
https://github.com/mjsax/flink/commit/fab61a1954ff1554448e826e1d273689ed520fc3
But if the gap between two rebases is large, it's hard to say what the
problem might be...
The old parent commit (ie, rebase before last rebase) was
https://github.com/mjsax/flink/commit/148395bcd81a93bcb1
What are the commits that you rebased on? Could you maybe narrow down what
caused the regression?
On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 at 23:31 Matthias J. Sax
wrote:
> I only report failing tests after a rebase. ;)
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 08/03/2015 11:23 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> > Thanks for reporting it , Matth
I only report failing tests after a rebase. ;)
-Matthias
On 08/03/2015 11:23 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> Thanks for reporting it , Matthias. Will try to run Travis for latest Flink.
>
> Tachyon test is a bit flaky. Maybe updating to latest release could help.
>
> - Henry
>
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015
Thanks for reporting it , Matthias. Will try to run Travis for latest Flink.
Tachyon test is a bit flaky. Maybe updating to latest release could help.
- Henry
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Matthias J. Sax
wrote:
> Today, not a single built was successful completely. Please see here:
>
> Flink
Today, not a single built was successful completely. Please see here:
Flink Streaming Core:
https://travis-ci.org/mjsax/flink/jobs/73938109
https://travis-ci.org/mjsax/flink/jobs/73951362
https://travis-ci.org/apache/flink/jobs/73938124
https://travis-ci.org/apache/flink/jobs/73899795
https://trav
13 matches
Mail list logo
