You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@maven.apache.org by Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de> on 2018/02/18 13:51:00 UTC
Surefire Jobs
Hi,
it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or more...
I would like to abort them ?
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>.
I forgot to say that those 4 ITs in m-failsafe-p take 30 seconds only, so
no big resource exh. And using timeout would prevent from long waiting.
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>
wrote:
> No reason.
> One job always took 1 hour. You do not have to.
> We are working on a release. If you commit anything to master I can start
> from the begin.
> After the release I will use parallel execution but I could not because
> Gavin from our INFRA team installed latest Pipeline Advanced Utilities few
> hour ago.
> There I needed lock() and zip().
> Why lock?
> Because failsafe-plugin has 4 integration tests and they bind to port
> 8083. If I run them in parallel, one cannot bind.
> I could find random port via helper-plugin but this was not guarantee
> either.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Tibor,
>>
>> On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
>>
>>> no, no
>>> Please do not do it!
>>>
>>
>> I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job ;-)...
>>
>>
>> We are waiting for them.
>>> They are expected to run 12 hours.
>>>
>>
>> Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
>>
>> You can compute it:
>>> 1 hour each run configuration.
>>> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one
>>> executor.
>>> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We will
>>> rather wait longer.
>>>
>>
>> Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them and see
>> if we can get them faster ...after the release...
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
>>>>> more...
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like to abort them ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Seemed to be gone already...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards
>>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Kind regards
>>>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>.
Hi Olivier,
I am traveling home. I will be available soon. ;-)
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 19 February 2018 at 09:20, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I am using the lock() in my company. The helper-plugin finds a port but
> two
> > jobs on one machine are so predicable that this mechanism would not be
> > reliable.
> > It happened to me in my company. The helper may help but it does not
> > guarantee anything.
> >
> > There are tests which work but they are not much reliable if e.g. the
> > machine is overloaded by neighboring job on the same machine.
> > For instance ParallelComputerBuilderTest computes exec time of parallel
> > test which can be perfectly computed. The delays are 0.5 second and they
> > should be longer. It's obvious why.
> >
>
> so can we change this a range?
>
>
> > The next is the Integration Test 1295 which has some race condition. See
> > another e-mail in our mailing list. I am discussing it already with the
> > person who created the IT and the native library too.
> >
> > It does not make sense to have parallel CI jobs unless I will improve
> these
> > tests.
> > The point is first to understand the internals of the project from the
> > history and the other things will come by themselves.
> > After the improvements are made the parallel execution can be used and
> the
> > likelihood that one test breaks due to concurrency is lower.
> > Notice we have 1400 tests altogether and 21 Jenkins jobs and none of the
> > tests must fail.
> >
> > We should make a deal.
> > We should not directly commit to the master unless we make a code review
> > together in a particular branch.
> > The branch should be open with name e.g. SUREFIRE-12345 which would be
> the
> > name of Jira issue.
> > I use to have one commit per branch (wasn't last time I know) and I use
> > *git
> > --amend* till it's acceptable.
> > The commit has name "[SUREFIRE-12345] Title in JIRA".
> >
>
> not everything has a jira...
> TAM there are so many branches. Are they all still relevant?
>
>
>
> >
> > It's too late.
> > Let's talk tomorrow evening.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tibor
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:26 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > what is the issue with helper-plugin? It's supposed to work.
> > > can you explain?
> > >
> > > I would prefer having this fix in the maven build itself rather than
> > > depends on some Jenkins extra configuration (make it easier for people
> to
> > > test in their own ci instance)
> > > perso I find this build too long in a CI perspective. You have to wait
> > very
> > > long to get feedback. Maybe reducing the number of maven version
> tested?
> > >
> > > On 19 February 2018 at 00:22, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > No reason.
> > > > One job always took 1 hour. You do not have to.
> > > > We are working on a release. If you commit anything to master I can
> > start
> > > > from the begin.
> > > > After the release I will use parallel execution but I could not
> because
> > > > Gavin from our INFRA team installed latest Pipeline Advanced
> Utilities
> > > few
> > > > hour ago.
> > > > There I needed lock() and zip().
> > > > Why lock?
> > > > Because failsafe-plugin has 4 integration tests and they bind to port
> > > 8083.
> > > > If I run them in parallel, one cannot bind.
> > > > I could find random port via helper-plugin but this was not guarantee
> > > > either.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> > khmarbaise@gmx.de>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Tibor,
> > > > >
> > > > > On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> no, no
> > > > >> Please do not do it!
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job
> > ;-)...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We are waiting for them.
> > > > >> They are expected to run 12 hours.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
> > > > >
> > > > > You can compute it:
> > > > >> 1 hour each run configuration.
> > > > >> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one
> > > > executor.
> > > > >> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We
> > will
> > > > >> rather wait longer.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them
> and
> > > see
> > > > > if we can get them faster ...after the release...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> > > khmarbaise@gmx.de
> > > > >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Hi,
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10
> hours
> > or
> > > > >>>> more...
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I would like to abort them ?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>> Seemed to be gone already...
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Kind regards
> > > > >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Kind regards
> > > > >>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Olivier Lamy
> > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
On 19 February 2018 at 09:20, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> I am using the lock() in my company. The helper-plugin finds a port but two
> jobs on one machine are so predicable that this mechanism would not be
> reliable.
> It happened to me in my company. The helper may help but it does not
> guarantee anything.
>
> There are tests which work but they are not much reliable if e.g. the
> machine is overloaded by neighboring job on the same machine.
> For instance ParallelComputerBuilderTest computes exec time of parallel
> test which can be perfectly computed. The delays are 0.5 second and they
> should be longer. It's obvious why.
>
so can we change this a range?
> The next is the Integration Test 1295 which has some race condition. See
> another e-mail in our mailing list. I am discussing it already with the
> person who created the IT and the native library too.
>
> It does not make sense to have parallel CI jobs unless I will improve these
> tests.
> The point is first to understand the internals of the project from the
> history and the other things will come by themselves.
> After the improvements are made the parallel execution can be used and the
> likelihood that one test breaks due to concurrency is lower.
> Notice we have 1400 tests altogether and 21 Jenkins jobs and none of the
> tests must fail.
>
> We should make a deal.
> We should not directly commit to the master unless we make a code review
> together in a particular branch.
> The branch should be open with name e.g. SUREFIRE-12345 which would be the
> name of Jira issue.
> I use to have one commit per branch (wasn't last time I know) and I use
> *git
> --amend* till it's acceptable.
> The commit has name "[SUREFIRE-12345] Title in JIRA".
>
not everything has a jira...
TAM there are so many branches. Are they all still relevant?
>
> It's too late.
> Let's talk tomorrow evening.
>
> Cheers
> Tibor
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:26 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > what is the issue with helper-plugin? It's supposed to work.
> > can you explain?
> >
> > I would prefer having this fix in the maven build itself rather than
> > depends on some Jenkins extra configuration (make it easier for people to
> > test in their own ci instance)
> > perso I find this build too long in a CI perspective. You have to wait
> very
> > long to get feedback. Maybe reducing the number of maven version tested?
> >
> > On 19 February 2018 at 00:22, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > No reason.
> > > One job always took 1 hour. You do not have to.
> > > We are working on a release. If you commit anything to master I can
> start
> > > from the begin.
> > > After the release I will use parallel execution but I could not because
> > > Gavin from our INFRA team installed latest Pipeline Advanced Utilities
> > few
> > > hour ago.
> > > There I needed lock() and zip().
> > > Why lock?
> > > Because failsafe-plugin has 4 integration tests and they bind to port
> > 8083.
> > > If I run them in parallel, one cannot bind.
> > > I could find random port via helper-plugin but this was not guarantee
> > > either.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> khmarbaise@gmx.de>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tibor,
> > > >
> > > > On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> no, no
> > > >> Please do not do it!
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job
> ;-)...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > We are waiting for them.
> > > >> They are expected to run 12 hours.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
> > > >
> > > > You can compute it:
> > > >> 1 hour each run configuration.
> > > >> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one
> > > executor.
> > > >> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We
> will
> > > >> rather wait longer.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them and
> > see
> > > > if we can get them faster ...after the release...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards
> > > > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> > khmarbaise@gmx.de
> > > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours
> or
> > > >>>> more...
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I would like to abort them ?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> Seemed to be gone already...
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Kind regards
> > > >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Kind regards
> > > >>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Olivier Lamy
> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> >
>
--
Olivier Lamy
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>.
I am using the lock() in my company. The helper-plugin finds a port but two
jobs on one machine are so predicable that this mechanism would not be
reliable.
It happened to me in my company. The helper may help but it does not
guarantee anything.
There are tests which work but they are not much reliable if e.g. the
machine is overloaded by neighboring job on the same machine.
For instance ParallelComputerBuilderTest computes exec time of parallel
test which can be perfectly computed. The delays are 0.5 second and they
should be longer. It's obvious why.
The next is the Integration Test 1295 which has some race condition. See
another e-mail in our mailing list. I am discussing it already with the
person who created the IT and the native library too.
It does not make sense to have parallel CI jobs unless I will improve these
tests.
The point is first to understand the internals of the project from the
history and the other things will come by themselves.
After the improvements are made the parallel execution can be used and the
likelihood that one test breaks due to concurrency is lower.
Notice we have 1400 tests altogether and 21 Jenkins jobs and none of the
tests must fail.
We should make a deal.
We should not directly commit to the master unless we make a code review
together in a particular branch.
The branch should be open with name e.g. SUREFIRE-12345 which would be the
name of Jira issue.
I use to have one commit per branch (wasn't last time I know) and I use *git
--amend* till it's acceptable.
The commit has name "[SUREFIRE-12345] Title in JIRA".
It's too late.
Let's talk tomorrow evening.
Cheers
Tibor
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 11:26 PM, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote:
> what is the issue with helper-plugin? It's supposed to work.
> can you explain?
>
> I would prefer having this fix in the maven build itself rather than
> depends on some Jenkins extra configuration (make it easier for people to
> test in their own ci instance)
> perso I find this build too long in a CI perspective. You have to wait very
> long to get feedback. Maybe reducing the number of maven version tested?
>
> On 19 February 2018 at 00:22, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > No reason.
> > One job always took 1 hour. You do not have to.
> > We are working on a release. If you commit anything to master I can start
> > from the begin.
> > After the release I will use parallel execution but I could not because
> > Gavin from our INFRA team installed latest Pipeline Advanced Utilities
> few
> > hour ago.
> > There I needed lock() and zip().
> > Why lock?
> > Because failsafe-plugin has 4 integration tests and they bind to port
> 8083.
> > If I run them in parallel, one cannot bind.
> > I could find random port via helper-plugin but this was not guarantee
> > either.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Tibor,
> > >
> > > On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
> > >
> > >> no, no
> > >> Please do not do it!
> > >>
> > >
> > > I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job ;-)...
> > >
> > >
> > > We are waiting for them.
> > >> They are expected to run 12 hours.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
> > >
> > > You can compute it:
> > >> 1 hour each run configuration.
> > >> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one
> > executor.
> > >> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We will
> > >> rather wait longer.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them and
> see
> > > if we can get them faster ...after the release...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> khmarbaise@gmx.de
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
> > >>>> more...
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I would like to abort them ?
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> Seemed to be gone already...
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Kind regards
> > >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> Kind regards
> > >>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>.
what is the issue with helper-plugin? It's supposed to work.
can you explain?
I would prefer having this fix in the maven build itself rather than
depends on some Jenkins extra configuration (make it easier for people to
test in their own ci instance)
perso I find this build too long in a CI perspective. You have to wait very
long to get feedback. Maybe reducing the number of maven version tested?
On 19 February 2018 at 00:22, Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> No reason.
> One job always took 1 hour. You do not have to.
> We are working on a release. If you commit anything to master I can start
> from the begin.
> After the release I will use parallel execution but I could not because
> Gavin from our INFRA team installed latest Pipeline Advanced Utilities few
> hour ago.
> There I needed lock() and zip().
> Why lock?
> Because failsafe-plugin has 4 integration tests and they bind to port 8083.
> If I run them in parallel, one cannot bind.
> I could find random port via helper-plugin but this was not guarantee
> either.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Tibor,
> >
> > On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
> >
> >> no, no
> >> Please do not do it!
> >>
> >
> > I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job ;-)...
> >
> >
> > We are waiting for them.
> >> They are expected to run 12 hours.
> >>
> >
> > Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
> >
> > You can compute it:
> >> 1 hour each run configuration.
> >> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one
> executor.
> >> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We will
> >> rather wait longer.
> >>
> >
> > Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them and see
> > if we can get them faster ...after the release...
> >
> >
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> >
> >
> >> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <khmarbaise@gmx.de
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
> >>>> more...
> >>>>
> >>>> I would like to abort them ?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Seemed to be gone already...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards
> >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Kind regards
> >>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> >>>>
> >>>
>
--
Olivier Lamy
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>.
No reason.
One job always took 1 hour. You do not have to.
We are working on a release. If you commit anything to master I can start
from the begin.
After the release I will use parallel execution but I could not because
Gavin from our INFRA team installed latest Pipeline Advanced Utilities few
hour ago.
There I needed lock() and zip().
Why lock?
Because failsafe-plugin has 4 integration tests and they bind to port 8083.
If I run them in parallel, one cannot bind.
I could find random port via helper-plugin but this was not guarantee
either.
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
wrote:
> Hi Tibor,
>
> On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
>
>> no, no
>> Please do not do it!
>>
>
> I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job ;-)...
>
>
> We are waiting for them.
>> They are expected to run 12 hours.
>>
>
> Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
>
> You can compute it:
>> 1 hour each run configuration.
>> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
>>
>
>
>
>> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one executor.
>> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We will
>> rather wait longer.
>>
>
> Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them and see
> if we can get them faster ...after the release...
>
>
>
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
>
>> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
>>>> more...
>>>>
>>>> I would like to abort them ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Seemed to be gone already...
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>>
>>>
>>>> Kind regards
>>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>>>
>>>
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>.
Hi Tibor,
On 18/02/18 15:13, Tibor Digana wrote:
> no, no
> Please do not do it!
I would have at least waited for a feedback before I kill a Job ;-)...
> We are waiting for them.
> They are expected to run 12 hours.
Wow that long..I wasn't aware of that...
> You can compute it:
> 1 hour each run configuration.
> Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
>
> I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one executor.
> Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We will
> rather wait longer.
Of course not...But I think we should take a deeper look at them and see
if we can get them faster ...after the release...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
> On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
>>> more...
>>>
>>> I would like to abort them ?
>>>
>>
>> Seemed to be gone already...
>>
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Tibor Digana <ti...@apache.org>.
no, no
Please do not do it!
We are waiting for them.
They are expected to run 12 hours.
You can compute it:
1 hour each run configuration.
Number of configuration is 3 Maven config * 4 JDKs.
I tried to run them in parallel but they appeared several in one executor.
Maybe later as parallel but now before release it is not safe. We will
rather wait longer.
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 2:56 PM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
>> more...
>>
>> I would like to abort them ?
>>
>
> Seemed to be gone already...
>
>
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Surefire Jobs
Posted by Karl Heinz Marbaise <kh...@gmx.de>.
Hi,
On 18/02/18 14:51, Karl Heinz Marbaise wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it seemed to me that there are Surefire Jobs stuck ..for 10 hours or
> more...
>
> I would like to abort them ?
Seemed to be gone already...
Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org