lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Laimonas Simutis <lai...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Reproducing random test failures
Date Tue, 19 May 2015 00:08:24 GMT
Wyatt,

I have a branch pushed for this named "failingtests", it is now running a
build on TC. Where does one specify which category of tests to run? I see
in the settings tab "NUnit categories include/exclude" but don't see where
to actually modify these values. The tests I would like to run belong to
category "Focus" :) Do you know where to change this?

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Wyatt Barnett <wyatt.barnett@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Good to hear I checked the right box.
>
> I'll see what I can pull together when I get home in terms of debug output.
> In terms of testing procedure what I was thinking is we make a new category
> -- call it "Focus" and then configure a build looking at your fork
> filtering for just those tests. You can then push away, fire off remote
> builds and check the output yourself.
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:50 PM Laimonas Simutis <laimis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Wyatt,
> >
> > I see the new options on TC, thanks for that. I still haven't thought
> about
> > how I will go about capturing the failures exactly, but will give you a
> > shout if I need some help with TC configuration just for those runs.
> >
> > If you can reproduce any of those test failures locally, do you mind
> > running them in VERBOSE mode (debug build without any other changes will
> > do), and emailing the console output that you get? I might be too
> > optimistic, but perhaps something there will stand out.
> >
> >
> > Thanks again!
> >
> > Laimis
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Wyatt Barnett <wyatt.barnett@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > For TestSort_2 -- It appears to be passing based on data at
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://teamcity.codebetter.com/project.html?projectId=LuceneNet&testNameId=-8365680837810961892&tab=testDetails
> > > ; I am having locally reproducable problems on the others though.
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Wyatt Barnett <
> wyatt.barnett@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Done -- you should now see a run button when you visit
> > > > http://teamcity.codebetter.com/project.html?projectId=LuceneNet
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Laimonas Simutis <laimis@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Wyatt,
> > > >>
> > > >> Could you add me to the lucene.net group on TC? I have a login
> there,
> > > >> username: laimis.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks!
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Wyatt Barnett <
> > wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Sounds good Laimis. You will need to setup a login to the
> CodeBetter
> > > >> > teamcity server and get added to the lucene.net group if you
> > haven't
> > > >> > already. Let me know if you need help there too.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 4:52 PM Laimonas Simutis <
> laimis@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Wyatt,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Sweet, I will let you know once I have a branch out with
> > additional
> > > >> > logging
> > > >> > > and separate category for tests that you can configure to
run.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Re: release mode, tried that and was able to fix a few bugs
> after
> > > >> > switching
> > > >> > > to it. They were in that PR with debug.assert changes. Who
> knows,
> > > the
> > > >> > > remaining failures might still be related to that, but can't
> > > >> reproduce it
> > > >> > > locally.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Laimis
> > > >> > > On May 16, 2015 4:34 PM, "Wyatt Barnett" <
> wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > Sorry about the blank one -- getting used to google
inbox here
> > > and I
> > > >> > > > misclicked.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Anyhow, I have a repro or at least a rhyme and reason
--
> > TeamCity
> > > is
> > > >> > > > running in release mode and I think we have difffering
> behavior
> > > >> there.
> > > >> > If
> > > >> > > > you switch your copy of visual studio to release mode
you will
> > get
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > same
> > > >> > > > failures we are seeing in TeamCity. Does that help
narrow it
> > down
> > > a
> > > >> > bit?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 4:26 PM Wyatt Barnett <
> > > >> wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM Wyatt Barnett
<
> > > >> > wyatt.barnett@gmail.com
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> I agree with Itamar -- it feels environmental.
I'll do some
> > > >> digging
> > > >> > > into
> > > >> > > > >> the teamcity output but I think the plan of
setting up some
> > > extra
> > > >> > > > verbose
> > > >> > > > >> logging here would make sense. I can set you
up with a
> > separate
> > > >> > build
> > > >> > > > >> pointed at your fork if that helps -- it will
keep the
> > feedback
> > > >> > cycle
> > > >> > > > >> tighter. The other thing we could do is categorize
the
> tests
> > > and
> > > >> > focus
> > > >> > > > that
> > > >> > > > >> build at running only that category so you
don't need to
> wait
> > > on
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > > whole
> > > >> > > > >> suite to get responses. Let me know if you
want me to
> proceed
> > > >> there.
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
<
> > > >> > > itamar@code972.com
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >>> Yes, that would be the best way to do
this. On Java
> Lucene,
> > > the
> > > >> > > > >>> randomized
> > > >> > > > >>> tests framework allows you to re-use the
random seed
> > > associated
> > > >> > with
> > > >> > > > the
> > > >> > > > >>> failure, but we are not there yet. Either
way, I suspect
> > this
> > > >> to be
> > > >> > > an
> > > >> > > > >>> environment issue rather than a code path
one.
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > >>> --
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > >>> Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > >> > > > >>> http://code972.com | @synhershko <
> > > >> https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> > > >> > > > >>> Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > >> > > > >>> Lucene.NET committer and PMC member
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > >>> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Laimonas
Simutis <
> > > >> > laimis@gmail.com
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > >>> > There are three tests that consistently
fail on TC but
> no
> > > >> matter
> > > >> > > how
> > > >> > > > >>> many
> > > >> > > > >>> > times I try, I can't reproduce it
locally. These tests
> > are:
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > TestFuzzyQuery.TestTieBreaker
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewLog.html?buildId=191298&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=LuceneNet_Core#testNameId-6371662534320583798
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > TestSimpleExplanations.TestDMQ8
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewLog.html?buildId=191298&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=LuceneNet_Core#testNameId5725706748293106127
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > TestTopDocsMerge.TestSort_2
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://teamcity.codebetter.com/viewLog.html?buildId=191298&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=LuceneNet_Core#testNameId-8365680837810961892
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > I would fix them if I could reproduce
it -- and I am
> > running
> > > >> out
> > > >> > of
> > > >> > > > >>> ideas
> > > >> > > > >>> > how to do it. Even if I put them
in a loop running
> > hundreds
> > > of
> > > >> > > > times, I
> > > >> > > > >>> > can't trigger the failure.
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > Anyone have any ideas how to go about
reproducing it? I
> am
> > > >> > thinking
> > > >> > > > to
> > > >> > > > >>> push
> > > >> > > > >>> > very verbose code in a separate branch
that logs the
> input
> > > >> > values /
> > > >> > > > >>> random
> > > >> > > > >>> > values that are used and see what
happens. Checking if
> > > anyone
> > > >> has
> > > >> > > any
> > > >> > > > >>> other
> > > >> > > > >>> > suggestions.
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>> > Laimis
> > > >> > > > >>> >
> > > >> > > > >>>
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > > >>
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message