You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com> on 2013/04/02 09:01:43 UTC
Master broken
Heya all,
Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
The failed tests are:
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
It appears to have something to do with the CreateNetworkOfferingTest trying to use the database (which is never there during test runs)
I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we might pool resources.
Cheers,
Hugo
Re: Master broken
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
On 4/12/13 9:35 AM, "Koushik Das" <ko...@citrix.com> wrote:
>There is already one
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Unit+Testing+101
>and also
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Unit+Testing+with+J
>Unit+and+Spring
>Also you can look at the some of the existing unit tests.
Yes, I know alex wrote one, still need some finalization procedures to
reduce mistakes like we have encountered in this thread. I'll go through
the existing test cases we have and update this document accordingly.
-Kelven
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rajesh Battala [mailto:rajesh.battala@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 8:32 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: Master broken
>>
>> +1 It would be very nice to see a wiki page how to write unit test. It
>>would be
>> great help.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Rajesh Battala
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
>> > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 7:57 PM
>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: Master broken
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:57:01PM -0700, Kelven Yang wrote:
>> > > These issues are caused by that some of components are not really
>> > > mocked, instead, they are loaded directly main source.
>> > >
>> > > One of the benefits from Spring is that it integrates with Mokito
>> > > nicely, all we need is to probably have a base test configuration
>> > > that returns all mocked DAOs or other common components and then
>> > > have all unit test purely written against mocked components.
>> > >
>> > > We need to finalize the way to write Java unit test so that everyone
>> > > can follow to reduce the frequency/prevent these from happening.
>> > > I'll find some time to update the Unit-test guideline document in
>> > > wiki, cleanup things in this area and re-enable all unit tests in
>>the build.
>> >
>> > +1 to this... that would be great to get sorted out Kelven!
RE: Master broken
Posted by Koushik Das <ko...@citrix.com>.
There is already one https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Unit+Testing+101 and also https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Unit+Testing+with+JUnit+and+Spring
Also you can look at the some of the existing unit tests.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rajesh Battala [mailto:rajesh.battala@citrix.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 8:32 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Master broken
>
> +1 It would be very nice to see a wiki page how to write unit test. It would be
> great help.
>
> Thanks
> Rajesh Battala
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 7:57 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Master broken
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:57:01PM -0700, Kelven Yang wrote:
> > > These issues are caused by that some of components are not really
> > > mocked, instead, they are loaded directly main source.
> > >
> > > One of the benefits from Spring is that it integrates with Mokito
> > > nicely, all we need is to probably have a base test configuration
> > > that returns all mocked DAOs or other common components and then
> > > have all unit test purely written against mocked components.
> > >
> > > We need to finalize the way to write Java unit test so that everyone
> > > can follow to reduce the frequency/prevent these from happening.
> > > I'll find some time to update the Unit-test guideline document in
> > > wiki, cleanup things in this area and re-enable all unit tests in the build.
> >
> > +1 to this... that would be great to get sorted out Kelven!
RE: Master broken
Posted by Rajesh Battala <ra...@citrix.com>.
+1 It would be very nice to see a wiki page how to write unit test. It would be great help.
Thanks
Rajesh Battala
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 7:57 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Master broken
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:57:01PM -0700, Kelven Yang wrote:
> > These issues are caused by that some of components are not really
> > mocked, instead, they are loaded directly main source.
> >
> > One of the benefits from Spring is that it integrates with Mokito
> > nicely, all we need is to probably have a base test configuration that
> > returns all mocked DAOs or other common components and then have all
> > unit test purely written against mocked components.
> >
> > We need to finalize the way to write Java unit test so that everyone
> > can follow to reduce the frequency/prevent these from happening. I'll
> > find some time to update the Unit-test guideline document in wiki,
> > cleanup things in this area and re-enable all unit tests in the build.
>
> +1 to this... that would be great to get sorted out Kelven!
Re: Master broken
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:57:01PM -0700, Kelven Yang wrote:
> These issues are caused by that some of components are not really mocked,
> instead, they are loaded directly main source.
>
> One of the benefits from Spring is that it integrates with Mokito nicely,
> all we need is to probably have a base test configuration that returns all
> mocked DAOs or other common components and then have all unit test purely
> written against mocked components.
>
> We need to finalize the way to write Java unit test so that everyone can
> follow to reduce the frequency/prevent these from happening. I'll find
> some time to update the Unit-test guideline document in wiki, cleanup
> things in this area and re-enable all unit tests in the build.
+1 to this... that would be great to get sorted out Kelven!
Re: Master broken
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
These issues are caused by that some of components are not really mocked,
instead, they are loaded directly main source.
One of the benefits from Spring is that it integrates with Mokito nicely,
all we need is to probably have a base test configuration that returns all
mocked DAOs or other common components and then have all unit test purely
written against mocked components.
We need to finalize the way to write Java unit test so that everyone can
follow to reduce the frequency/prevent these from happening. I'll find
some time to update the Unit-test guideline document in wiki, cleanup
things in this area and re-enable all unit tests in the build.
Kelven
On 4/9/13 1:57 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
>> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 3:51 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Master broken
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 07:44:41AM +0000, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
>> > > Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 7:16 PM
>> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> > > Subject: Re: Master broken
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 05:27:11AM +0000, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
>> > > > Ah - misunderstood. Like Hugo said, a test that fails on presence
>> > > > of db
>> > > connection should solve this. But I hope ppl will turn mysql on (as
>> > > an additional step) to run the bvt. Or better yet, I can look into
>> > > those db tests and port them as marvin tests.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Perhaps I'm confused, but having a unit test that fails the build if
>> > > MySQL is running on the local machine seems like a really bad idea.
>> > >
>> > > I think the problem to solve is just that we want to avoid unit
>> > > tests that require a DB. As long as we all know this, and that we
>> > > have build jobs that fail on the CI side of things, isn't that
>>enough?
>> > >
>> > > Am I confused?
>> >
>> > No :-)
>> >
>> > The idea is to avoid unit tests that rely on the DB. However this is
>>rather
>> difficult to do in some cases. We have a lot of autoloading going on,
>>so in
>> some cases a simple fix to components could suddenly result in having a
>> component that requires a database connection. If the developer in
>>question
>> has an active database, he/she will never notice until the tests hit
>>the master
>> branch and Jenkins starts complaining.
>> >
>> > My idea was to solve this by adding a negative test (break if you have
>> database) to give people a reminder (by breaking their build) if they
>>have an
>> active database. That could help developers remember to shut it down
>> before compiling.
>>
>> I'm against this. It shouldn't be a build requirement to *not* have a
>>DB
>> running. That would be exceptionally complicated for people to deal
>>with all
>> the time, just to avoid inappropriate unit tests.
>
>That's a good point :-) I was also having mixed feelings about this,
>just trying to help people remember that they should build unittests that
>don't rely on the db.
>
>I'm dropping this suggestion :-)
RE: Master broken
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 3:51 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Master broken
>
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 07:44:41AM +0000, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 7:16 PM
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Master broken
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 05:27:11AM +0000, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > > > Ah - misunderstood. Like Hugo said, a test that fails on presence
> > > > of db
> > > connection should solve this. But I hope ppl will turn mysql on (as
> > > an additional step) to run the bvt. Or better yet, I can look into
> > > those db tests and port them as marvin tests.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Perhaps I'm confused, but having a unit test that fails the build if
> > > MySQL is running on the local machine seems like a really bad idea.
> > >
> > > I think the problem to solve is just that we want to avoid unit
> > > tests that require a DB. As long as we all know this, and that we
> > > have build jobs that fail on the CI side of things, isn't that enough?
> > >
> > > Am I confused?
> >
> > No :-)
> >
> > The idea is to avoid unit tests that rely on the DB. However this is rather
> difficult to do in some cases. We have a lot of autoloading going on, so in
> some cases a simple fix to components could suddenly result in having a
> component that requires a database connection. If the developer in question
> has an active database, he/she will never notice until the tests hit the master
> branch and Jenkins starts complaining.
> >
> > My idea was to solve this by adding a negative test (break if you have
> database) to give people a reminder (by breaking their build) if they have an
> active database. That could help developers remember to shut it down
> before compiling.
>
> I'm against this. It shouldn't be a build requirement to *not* have a DB
> running. That would be exceptionally complicated for people to deal with all
> the time, just to avoid inappropriate unit tests.
That's a good point :-) I was also having mixed feelings about this, just trying to help people remember that they should build unittests that don't rely on the db.
I'm dropping this suggestion :-)
Re: Master broken
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 07:44:41AM +0000, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 7:16 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Master broken
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 05:27:11AM +0000, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > > Ah - misunderstood. Like Hugo said, a test that fails on presence of db
> > connection should solve this. But I hope ppl will turn mysql on (as an
> > additional step) to run the bvt. Or better yet, I can look into those db tests
> > and port them as marvin tests.
> > >
> >
> > Perhaps I'm confused, but having a unit test that fails the build if MySQL is
> > running on the local machine seems like a really bad idea.
> >
> > I think the problem to solve is just that we want to avoid unit tests that
> > require a DB. As long as we all know this, and that we have build jobs that fail
> > on the CI side of things, isn't that enough?
> >
> > Am I confused?
>
> No :-)
>
> The idea is to avoid unit tests that rely on the DB. However this is rather difficult to do in some cases. We have a lot of autoloading going on, so in some cases a simple fix to components could suddenly result in having a component that requires a database connection. If the developer in question has an active database, he/she will never notice until the tests hit the master branch and Jenkins starts complaining.
>
> My idea was to solve this by adding a negative test (break if you have database) to give people a reminder (by breaking their build) if they have an active database. That could help developers remember to shut it down before compiling.
I'm against this. It shouldn't be a build requirement to *not* have a
DB running. That would be exceptionally complicated for people to deal
with all the time, just to avoid inappropriate unit tests.
RE: Master broken
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 7:16 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Master broken
>
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 05:27:11AM +0000, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > Ah - misunderstood. Like Hugo said, a test that fails on presence of db
> connection should solve this. But I hope ppl will turn mysql on (as an
> additional step) to run the bvt. Or better yet, I can look into those db tests
> and port them as marvin tests.
> >
>
> Perhaps I'm confused, but having a unit test that fails the build if MySQL is
> running on the local machine seems like a really bad idea.
>
> I think the problem to solve is just that we want to avoid unit tests that
> require a DB. As long as we all know this, and that we have build jobs that fail
> on the CI side of things, isn't that enough?
>
> Am I confused?
No :-)
The idea is to avoid unit tests that rely on the DB. However this is rather difficult to do in some cases. We have a lot of autoloading going on, so in some cases a simple fix to components could suddenly result in having a component that requires a database connection. If the developer in question has an active database, he/she will never notice until the tests hit the master branch and Jenkins starts complaining.
My idea was to solve this by adding a negative test (break if you have database) to give people a reminder (by breaking their build) if they have an active database. That could help developers remember to shut it down before compiling.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Prasanna.,
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 05:21 AM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>
> > Subject: RE: Master broken
> >
> > > That will be hard to do since the checkin test requires the DB to be
> > > present as it starts up the server and sets-up the databases. We'd
> > > have to turn it off for the build and turn it back on again for the
> > > bvt. Best if we avoid doing - DskipTests when building as a general good
> rule.
> >
> > I don't think -DskipTests is the problem. The problem is actually people
> who are running the unit tests have db on their laptops so if they have unit
> tests that require DB will run on their laptop but fails on Jenkins, which
> doesn't have a db.
> >
> > --Alex
> >
Re: Master broken
Posted by Chip Childers <ch...@sungard.com>.
On Sat, Apr 06, 2013 at 05:27:11AM +0000, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> Ah - misunderstood. Like Hugo said, a test that fails on presence of db connection should solve this. But I hope ppl will turn mysql on (as an additional step) to run the bvt. Or better yet, I can look into those db tests and port them as marvin tests.
>
Perhaps I'm confused, but having a unit test that fails the build if
MySQL is running on the local machine seems like a really bad idea.
I think the problem to solve is just that we want to avoid unit tests
that require a DB. As long as we all know this, and that we have build
jobs that fail on the CI side of things, isn't that enough?
Am I confused?
>
>
>
> --
> Prasanna.,
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 05:21 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>
> Subject: RE: Master broken
>
> > That will be hard to do since the checkin test requires the DB to be present as
> > it starts up the server and sets-up the databases. We'd have to turn it off for
> > the build and turn it back on again for the bvt. Best if we avoid doing -
> > DskipTests when building as a general good rule.
>
> I don't think -DskipTests is the problem. The problem is actually people who are running the unit tests have db on their laptops so if they have unit tests that require DB will run on their laptop but fails on Jenkins, which doesn't have a db.
>
> --Alex
>
Re: Master broken
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
Sent from my iPhone
On 5 apr. 2013, at 23:21, "Alex Huang" <Al...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> That will be hard to do since the checkin test requires the DB to be present as
>> it starts up the server and sets-up the databases. We'd have to turn it off for
>> the build and turn it back on again for the bvt. Best if we avoid doing -
>> DskipTests when building as a general good rule.
>
> I don't think -DskipTests is the problem. The problem is actually people who are running the unit tests have db on their laptops so if they have unit tests that require DB will run on their laptop but fails on Jenkins, which doesn't have a db.
We could make a small unit test that would fail if a database is detected. Would that help?
>
> --Alex
Re: Master broken
Posted by Prasanna Santhanam <Pr...@citrix.com>.
Ah - misunderstood. Like Hugo said, a test that fails on presence of db connection should solve this. But I hope ppl will turn mysql on (as an additional step) to run the bvt. Or better yet, I can look into those db tests and port them as marvin tests.
--
Prasanna.,
----- Original Message -----
From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 05:21 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <de...@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Master broken
> That will be hard to do since the checkin test requires the DB to be present as
> it starts up the server and sets-up the databases. We'd have to turn it off for
> the build and turn it back on again for the bvt. Best if we avoid doing -
> DskipTests when building as a general good rule.
I don't think -DskipTests is the problem. The problem is actually people who are running the unit tests have db on their laptops so if they have unit tests that require DB will run on their laptop but fails on Jenkins, which doesn't have a db.
--Alex
RE: Master broken
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
> That will be hard to do since the checkin test requires the DB to be present as
> it starts up the server and sets-up the databases. We'd have to turn it off for
> the build and turn it back on again for the bvt. Best if we avoid doing -
> DskipTests when building as a general good rule.
I don't think -DskipTests is the problem. The problem is actually people who are running the unit tests have db on their laptops so if they have unit tests that require DB will run on their laptop but fails on Jenkins, which doesn't have a db.
--Alex
Re: Master broken
Posted by prasanna <ts...@apache.org>.
On 4 April 2013 05:15, Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com> wrote:
> Prasanna,
>
> This is actually a very interesting case. In our check-in test, is there any way for us to disable db access when running the unit tests? I can see that this would be one of the things that the developer can easily forget but hits on the build server and breaks the Jenkins build often.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --Alex
>
That will be hard to do since the checkin test requires the DB to be
present as it starts up the server and sets-up the databases. We'd
have to turn it off for the build and turn it back on again for the
bvt. Best if we avoid doing -DskipTests when building as a general
good rule.
RE: Master broken
Posted by Alex Huang <Al...@citrix.com>.
Prasanna,
This is actually a very interesting case. In our check-in test, is there any way for us to disable db access when running the unit tests? I can see that this would be one of the things that the developer can easily forget but hits on the build server and breaks the Jenkins build often.
Thanks.
--Alex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2013 11:23 AM
> To: Hugo Trippaers; Alena Prokharchyk; dev@cloudstack.apache.org;
> cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Master broken
>
>
>
> On 4/3/13 12:42 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Kelven,
> >
> >That commit (5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 ) was actually
> >the commit that broke the tests. In that commit you add the call to
> >'ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle();' which in turn initializes
> >other modules and some of them make database calls. Those database call
> >will fail on our Jenkins systems as they have no database running.
> >
> >Can you try the following:
> > * shutdown any local mysql databases
> > * git checkout 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426
> > * mvn clean test
> >
> >I expect that you will get the same error, if not something strange is
> >happening. You have to make sure that you are not running a database on
> >the localhost though. Otherwise the test will succeed
>
>
> Now it makes sense and that's why I couldn't see this problem happen in my
> local environment. I'll give it a way without local mysql DB
>
> -Kelven
>
>
> >
> >I'll add a negative testcase that will fail if a local database is
> >present to prevent this, I ran into the same problem a while back.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Hugo
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 7:41 PM
> >> To: Alena Prokharchyk; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-
> >> dev@incubator.apache.org; Hugo Trippaers
> >> Subject: Re: Master broken
> >>
> >> I've applied a commit 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 to
> >>address these test configuration fix already. This was done at last
> >>Friday.
> >>
> >> Kelven
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/2/13 9:39 AM, "Alena Prokharchyk" <Al...@citrix.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The test itself is written by me. It doesn't touch the DB - I mock
> >> >"persist" method of the corresponding Dao. The test was added about
> >> >2 weeks ago to master branch, and it was running fine the last time
> >> >I've checked - last Friday.
> >> >
> >> >As Pranav stated, the test got broken with commit
> >> >5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426, and related to
> UserContext
> >> >initializing.
> >> >
> >> >-Alena.
> >> >
> >> >On 4/2/13 1:32 AM, "Pranav Saxena" <pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Yeah I saw that . Thanks Hugo . I hope master is stable now though
> >> >>I haven't got a change to build it again.
> >> >>
> >> >>Regards,
> >> >>Pranav
> >> >>
> >> >>-----Original Message-----
> >> >>From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
> >> >>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:37 PM
> >> >>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-
> dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> >>Subject: RE: Master broken
> >> >>
> >> >>Thanks Pranav,
> >> >>
> >> >>I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it.
> >> >>See commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
> >> >>
> >> >>Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
> >> >>
> >> >>Cheers,
> >> >>
> >> >>Hugo
> >> >>
> >> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >> >>> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
> >> >>> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
> >> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org;
> >> >>> cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> >>> Subject: RE: Master broken
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering -
> >>Commit:
> >> >>> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming
> >> because
> >> >>> of this only the test is failing.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> You might need to revert the commit if required.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Pranav
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >> >>> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
> >> >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
> >> >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> >>> Subject: Master broken
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Heya all,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The failed tests are:
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >> >>> >>>re
> >> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It appears to have something to do with the
> >> >>> CreateNetworkOfferingTest trying to use the database (which is
> >> >>> never there during test runs)
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we
> >> >>> might pool resources.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cheers,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hugo
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >
Re: Master broken
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
On 4/3/13 12:42 AM, "Hugo Trippaers" <HT...@schubergphilis.com> wrote:
>Kelven,
>
>That commit (5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 ) was actually the
>commit that broke the tests. In that commit you add the call to
>'ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle();' which in turn initializes
>other modules and some of them make database calls. Those database call
>will fail on our Jenkins systems as they have no database running.
>
>Can you try the following:
> * shutdown any local mysql databases
> * git checkout 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426
> * mvn clean test
>
>I expect that you will get the same error, if not something strange is
>happening. You have to make sure that you are not running a database on
>the localhost though. Otherwise the test will succeed
Now it makes sense and that's why I couldn't see this problem happen in my
local environment. I'll give it a way without local mysql DB
-Kelven
>
>I'll add a negative testcase that will fail if a local database is
>present to prevent this, I ran into the same problem a while back.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Hugo
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 7:41 PM
>> To: Alena Prokharchyk; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-
>> dev@incubator.apache.org; Hugo Trippaers
>> Subject: Re: Master broken
>>
>> I've applied a commit 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 to
>> address these test configuration fix already. This was done at last
>>Friday.
>>
>> Kelven
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/2/13 9:39 AM, "Alena Prokharchyk" <Al...@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The test itself is written by me. It doesn't touch the DB - I mock
>> >"persist" method of the corresponding Dao. The test was added about 2
>> >weeks ago to master branch, and it was running fine the last time I've
>> >checked - last Friday.
>> >
>> >As Pranav stated, the test got broken with commit
>> >5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426, and related to UserContext
>> >initializing.
>> >
>> >-Alena.
>> >
>> >On 4/2/13 1:32 AM, "Pranav Saxena" <pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Yeah I saw that . Thanks Hugo . I hope master is stable now though I
>> >>haven't got a change to build it again.
>> >>
>> >>Regards,
>> >>Pranav
>> >>
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
>> >>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:37 PM
>> >>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>Subject: RE: Master broken
>> >>
>> >>Thanks Pranav,
>> >>
>> >>I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it.
>> >>See commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
>> >>
>> >>Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
>> >>
>> >>Cheers,
>> >>
>> >>Hugo
>> >>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
>> >>> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
>> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: RE: Master broken
>> >>>
>> >>> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering -
>>Commit:
>> >>> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming
>> because
>> >>> of this only the test is failing.
>> >>>
>> >>> You might need to revert the commit if required.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Pranav
>> >>>
>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>> >>> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
>> >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: Master broken
>> >>>
>> >>> Heya all,
>> >>>
>> >>> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
>> >>>
>> >>> The failed tests are:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
>> >>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
>> >>> >>>re
>> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> It appears to have something to do with the
>> >>> CreateNetworkOfferingTest trying to use the database (which is never
>> >>> there during test runs)
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we
>> >>> might pool resources.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>>
>> >>> Hugo
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>
RE: Master broken
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
Kelven,
That commit (5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 ) was actually the commit that broke the tests. In that commit you add the call to 'ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle();' which in turn initializes other modules and some of them make database calls. Those database call will fail on our Jenkins systems as they have no database running.
Can you try the following:
* shutdown any local mysql databases
* git checkout 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426
* mvn clean test
I expect that you will get the same error, if not something strange is happening. You have to make sure that you are not running a database on the localhost though. Otherwise the test will succeed.
I'll add a negative testcase that will fail if a local database is present to prevent this, I ran into the same problem a while back.
Cheers,
Hugo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kelven Yang [mailto:kelven.yang@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 7:41 PM
> To: Alena Prokharchyk; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-
> dev@incubator.apache.org; Hugo Trippaers
> Subject: Re: Master broken
>
> I've applied a commit 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 to
> address these test configuration fix already. This was done at last Friday.
>
> Kelven
>
>
>
> On 4/2/13 9:39 AM, "Alena Prokharchyk" <Al...@citrix.com>
> wrote:
>
> >The test itself is written by me. It doesn't touch the DB - I mock
> >"persist" method of the corresponding Dao. The test was added about 2
> >weeks ago to master branch, and it was running fine the last time I've
> >checked - last Friday.
> >
> >As Pranav stated, the test got broken with commit
> >5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426, and related to UserContext
> >initializing.
> >
> >-Alena.
> >
> >On 4/2/13 1:32 AM, "Pranav Saxena" <pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Yeah I saw that . Thanks Hugo . I hope master is stable now though I
> >>haven't got a change to build it again.
> >>
> >>Regards,
> >>Pranav
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
> >>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:37 PM
> >>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>Subject: RE: Master broken
> >>
> >>Thanks Pranav,
> >>
> >>I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it.
> >>See commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
> >>
> >>Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
> >>
> >>Cheers,
> >>
> >>Hugo
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
> >>> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
> >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Subject: RE: Master broken
> >>>
> >>> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering - Commit:
> >>> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming
> because
> >>> of this only the test is failing.
> >>>
> >>> You might need to revert the commit if required.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Pranav
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
> >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Master broken
> >>>
> >>> Heya all,
> >>>
> >>> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
> >>>
> >>> The failed tests are:
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >>> >>>
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.c
> >>> >>>re
> >>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> It appears to have something to do with the
> >>> CreateNetworkOfferingTest trying to use the database (which is never
> >>> there during test runs)
> >>>
> >>> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we
> >>> might pool resources.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Hugo
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
Re: Master broken
Posted by Kelven Yang <ke...@citrix.com>.
I've applied a commit 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 to address
these test configuration fix already. This was done at last Friday.
Kelven
On 4/2/13 9:39 AM, "Alena Prokharchyk" <Al...@citrix.com>
wrote:
>The test itself is written by me. It doesn't touch the DB - I mock
>"persist" method of the corresponding Dao. The test was added about 2
>weeks ago to master branch, and it was running fine the last time I've
>checked - last Friday.
>
>As Pranav stated, the test got broken with commit
>5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426, and related to UserContext
>initializing.
>
>-Alena.
>
>On 4/2/13 1:32 AM, "Pranav Saxena" <pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>Yeah I saw that . Thanks Hugo . I hope master is stable now though I
>>haven't got a change to build it again.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Pranav
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
>>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:37 PM
>>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>Subject: RE: Master broken
>>
>>Thanks Pranav,
>>
>>I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it. See
>>commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
>>
>>Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Hugo
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: Master broken
>>>
>>> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering - Commit:
>>> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming because of
>>> this only the test is failing.
>>>
>>> You might need to revert the commit if required.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pranav
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Master broken
>>>
>>> Heya all,
>>>
>>> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
>>>
>>> The failed tests are:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
>>> >>>
>>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
>>>
>>>
>>> It appears to have something to do with the CreateNetworkOfferingTest
>>> trying to use the database (which is never there during test runs)
>>>
>>> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we might
>>> pool resources.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Hugo
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Master broken
Posted by Alena Prokharchyk <Al...@citrix.com>.
The test itself is written by me. It doesn't touch the DB - I mock
"persist" method of the corresponding Dao. The test was added about 2
weeks ago to master branch, and it was running fine the last time I've
checked - last Friday.
As Pranav stated, the test got broken with commit
5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426, and related to UserContext
initializing.
-Alena.
On 4/2/13 1:32 AM, "Pranav Saxena" <pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>Yeah I saw that . Thanks Hugo . I hope master is stable now though I
>haven't got a change to build it again.
>
>Regards,
>Pranav
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:37 PM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: Master broken
>
>Thanks Pranav,
>
>I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it. See
>commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
>
>Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Hugo
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
>> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: Master broken
>>
>> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering - Commit:
>> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming because of
>> this only the test is failing.
>>
>> You might need to revert the commit if required.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pranav
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Master broken
>>
>> Heya all,
>>
>> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
>>
>> The failed tests are:
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
>> >>>
>> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
>> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
>>
>>
>> It appears to have something to do with the CreateNetworkOfferingTest
>> trying to use the database (which is never there during test runs)
>>
>> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we might
>> pool resources.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Hugo
>
>
RE: Master broken
Posted by Pranav Saxena <pr...@citrix.com>.
Yeah I saw that . Thanks Hugo . I hope master is stable now though I haven't got a change to build it again.
Regards,
Pranav
-----Original Message-----
From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 1:37 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Master broken
Thanks Pranav,
I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it. See commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
Cheers,
Hugo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Master broken
>
> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering - Commit:
> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming because of
> this only the test is failing.
>
> You might need to revert the commit if required.
>
> Thanks,
> Pranav
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Master broken
>
> Heya all,
>
> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
>
> The failed tests are:
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >>>
> >>>org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
>
>
> It appears to have something to do with the CreateNetworkOfferingTest
> trying to use the database (which is never there during test runs)
>
> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we might
> pool resources.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
RE: Master broken
Posted by Hugo Trippaers <HT...@schubergphilis.com>.
Thanks Pranav,
I couldn't find an easy way to fix the test so I indeed disabled it. See commit df6b97c194caa8b34fa14bf5164eb2fe1f26b2b1.
Raised a ticket for Kelven (CLOUDSTACK-1884) to have a look at it.
Cheers,
Hugo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.saxena@citrix.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 2 april 2013 10:04
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Master broken
>
> This commit deals with the tests for create network offering - Commit:
> 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming because of
> this only the test is failing.
>
> You might need to revert the commit if required.
>
> Thanks,
> Pranav
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Master broken
>
> Heya all,
>
> Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
>
> The failed tests are:
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
> >>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.cre
> ateIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
>
>
> It appears to have something to do with the CreateNetworkOfferingTest
> trying to use the database (which is never there during test runs)
>
> I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we might pool
> resources.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
RE: Master broken
Posted by Pranav Saxena <pr...@citrix.com>.
This commit deals with the tests for create network offering - Commit: 5782abf8f80fce929e3d6e20068bc165f2360426 and I am presuming because of this only the test is failing.
You might need to revert the commit if required.
Thanks,
Pranav
-----Original Message-----
From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:HTrippaers@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:32 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Master broken
Heya all,
Master branch appears to be broken. Is anybody working on this?
The failed tests are:
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithoutSpecifyIpRanges
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndSourceNat
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createSharedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRanges
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithNoVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithVlan
>>> org.apache.cloudstack.networkoffering.CreateNetworkOfferingTest.createIsolatedNtwkOffWithSpecifyIpRangesAndNoSourceNat
It appears to have something to do with the CreateNetworkOfferingTest trying to use the database (which is never there during test runs)
I'm looking at it, but if somebody else is doing that as well we might pool resources.
Cheers,
Hugo