You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@couchdb.apache.org by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> on 2012/02/24 19:16:30 UTC
[VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Hello,
I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
We encourage the whole community to download and test these
release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
tree-ish in git:
4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
And include the following 3rd party code:
Erlang R14B04 or R15B
OpenSSL 0.9.8r
wxWidgets 2.8.12
Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
cURL 7.23.1
ICU 4.6.1
Inno setup 5.4.3
Please follow the test procedure before voting:
https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>.
Hi!
Have installed setup-couchdb-1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe on Windows 2003 x86 SP2
Seems like everything works as before except tests (Chrome 16):
changes failure 3317ms
Assertion failed: expected '0', got '2'
Assertion failed: expected '0', got '2'
reduce failure 3658ms
Assertion failed: expected '6', got '7'
Assertion failed: expected '7', got '8'
Assertion failed: expected '8', got '9'
Assertion failed: expected '8', got '9'
Assertion failed: expected '7', got '8'
Assertion failed: expected '6', got '7'
Assertion failed: expected '1', got '2'
Assertion failed: expected '2', got '3'
replicator_db failure 66310ms
Assertion failed: copy === null
Assertion failed: copy === null
Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"2-19d0c28ea169872441d6d33c2c5a6cce","value":666}'
stats failure 8126ms
Assertion 'We have the same number of open dbs.' failed: expected '2', got '0'
Assertion 'We have the same number of open files.' failed: expected
'4', got '0'
users_db_security failure 906ms
Assertion 'false, "anonymous can read _changes"' failed: anonymous
can read _changes
Assertion 'user can't read _changes' failed: expected
'"unauthorized"', got 'null'
view_errors failure 2047ms
Assertion failed: xhr.status == 500
Assertion failed: result.error == "reduce_overflow_error"
attachment_ranges had failed, but this is expected behavior for Chrome.
--
,,,^..^,,,
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by "Kevin R. Coombes" <ke...@gmail.com>.
Using R14B04
Windows 7 Enterprise, SP 1, 64-bit
Firefox 10.0.2 (privacy mode, cache cleared)
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware
End-user verification OK
Futon tests failed:
replication
1. *Assertion failed:* |expected '"tony"', got 'null'|
2. *Assertion 'Unauthorized to cancel replication' failed:* |expected
'401', got '200'|
3. *Assertion failed:* |expected '"unauthorized"', got 'null'|
4. *Assertion 'Authorized to cancel replication' failed:* |expected
'200', got '404'|
replicator_db
1. *Assertion failed:* |copy === null|
2. *Assertion failed:* |expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'|
Similar errors reported by Nick North. If these are known/acceptable
timing issues, then still
+1
On 2/24/2012 12:16 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
>
> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> tree-ish in git:
>
> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>
> And include the following 3rd party code:
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> A+
> Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 24 February 2012 21:16, Dirkjan Ochtman <di...@ochtman.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 19:16, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>>
>> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> On Windows 7, 64-bit, I downloaded the R15B version of the installer
> and installed it. Located couchdb.bat in the bin folder, ran it,
> pointed the brower at localhost:5984 and ran the test suite.
> Everything seemed to work alright except that from users_db_security
> on, all tests started failing with "error": "unauthorized", "reason":
> "You are not a server admin". This subsequently even happened on
> rerunning tests that had previously passed.
>
> (I'm admittedly a stranger to CouchDB on Windows, although I've run it
> on Linux boxen for years.)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dirkjan
Thanks Dirkjan,
It looks like something got stuck during the security tests. Can you
try this over LAN rather than localhost, after tidying up?
- clean out %COUCH%\var\lib\couchdb\* (cleans up the _users.couch in
particular)
- revert local.ini as needed, IIRC shouldn't be more than removing the
new entries in [admins]
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dirkjan Ochtman <di...@ochtman.nl>.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 19:16, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
On Windows 7, 64-bit, I downloaded the R15B version of the installer
and installed it. Located couchdb.bat in the bin folder, ran it,
pointed the brower at localhost:5984 and ran the test suite.
Everything seemed to work alright except that from users_db_security
on, all tests started failing with "error": "unauthorized", "reason":
"You are not a server admin". This subsequently even happened on
rerunning tests that had previously passed.
(I'm admittedly a stranger to CouchDB on Windows, although I've run it
on Linux boxen for years.)
Cheers,
Dirkjan
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
Win8 with R15B much like Win7:
+1
Windows8 Developer Preview x64 (on VMWare)
Firefox 10.0.2
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware
End-user verification OK
Futon tests failed
All passed except replicator_db, which fails in various ways both locally
and over the network, often with: Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'. But
I believe this is a known timing issue so am still +1
Nick
On 24 February 2012 18:16, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
>
> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> tree-ish in git:
>
> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>
> And include the following 3rd party code:
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> A+
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
If there are any proposed patches to replicator_db timing I'd be happy to
try them out, as I haven't yet managed to get this test to work at all in
Win7 or Win8 with the latest build. The failures are not always identical:
the number of "copy === null" failures varies, and I've occasionally had
two "foo666" failures rather than one. But the overall result is always the
same, so I may happen to have a good testbed.
Nick
On 25 February 2012 19:12, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> On 25 February 2012 12:39, Jeroen Janssen <je...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Here are my results so far.
> >
> > setup-couchdb-1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe
> > Windows 7 x64
> > Google Chrome 19.0.1049.3.dev-m
> > signature OK
> > md5 & sha OK
> > No malware - Avira Internet Security 2012
> >
> > Test failures:
> > attachment_ranges
> > 1.Assertion failed: expected '"bytes 0-28/29"', got '"bytes 0-29/29"'
> > 2.Assertion failed: expected '"29"', got '"30"'
>
> Thanks Jeroen,
>
> above are bad chrome, so that's fine for me.
>
> > replicator_db
> > 1.Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
> >
> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
> >
> > (I believe both of these failures are known/accepted already)
>
> I also had this previously on round 1 of 1.2.0 voting, and after
> fiddling with the timing in the test suite, it disappeared. However I
> couldn't get it to repeat in 1.2.0 round 2 (this build). I'm don't see
> this is a blocker but until I can at least trigger it reliably I can't
> do a patch to fix it. If you can get it reliably, try hacking in
>
> https://github.com/apache/couchdb/blob/1.2.x/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js
>
> > However, in my couchdb.log I see a total of 28 crash_reports happening
> > during the test. I don't know if this is 'expected' to happen during
> > the test.
> > I put the full couchdb logging of running the whole test suite at
> > http://db.tt/mcmruUSZ
>
> As Jason pointed out, this is normal.
>
> CouchDB is built up of a number of erlang/OTP applications. In the OTP
> world these could be independently packaged and distributed, although
> Couch is a little way to go before that's possible. The way we set up
> logging also puts these application startups/shutdowns in the log,
> notably every time we restart couchdb, we simply call init:restart()
> which hard stops the erlang VM and restarts it. This is easy for us
> but messy in the logs.
>
> > If someone can confirm that all the crash_reports are expected, then I
> > can +1 this.
>
> I'm happy with that - awesome! And thanks for testing trunk snapshots
> over the last 6 or so months it was a great help.
>
> A+
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 25 February 2012 12:39, Jeroen Janssen <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here are my results so far.
>
> setup-couchdb-1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe
> Windows 7 x64
> Google Chrome 19.0.1049.3.dev-m
> signature OK
> md5 & sha OK
> No malware - Avira Internet Security 2012
>
> Test failures:
> attachment_ranges
> 1.Assertion failed: expected '"bytes 0-28/29"', got '"bytes 0-29/29"'
> 2.Assertion failed: expected '"29"', got '"30"'
Thanks Jeroen,
above are bad chrome, so that's fine for me.
> replicator_db
> 1.Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
> '{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
>
> (I believe both of these failures are known/accepted already)
I also had this previously on round 1 of 1.2.0 voting, and after
fiddling with the timing in the test suite, it disappeared. However I
couldn't get it to repeat in 1.2.0 round 2 (this build). I'm don't see
this is a blocker but until I can at least trigger it reliably I can't
do a patch to fix it. If you can get it reliably, try hacking in
https://github.com/apache/couchdb/blob/1.2.x/share/www/script/test/replicator_db.js
> However, in my couchdb.log I see a total of 28 crash_reports happening
> during the test. I don't know if this is 'expected' to happen during
> the test.
> I put the full couchdb logging of running the whole test suite at
> http://db.tt/mcmruUSZ
As Jason pointed out, this is normal.
CouchDB is built up of a number of erlang/OTP applications. In the OTP
world these could be independently packaged and distributed, although
Couch is a little way to go before that's possible. The way we set up
logging also puts these application startups/shutdowns in the log,
notably every time we restart couchdb, we simply call init:restart()
which hard stops the erlang VM and restarts it. This is easy for us
but messy in the logs.
> If someone can confirm that all the crash_reports are expected, then I
> can +1 this.
I'm happy with that - awesome! And thanks for testing trunk snapshots
over the last 6 or so months it was a great help.
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Jeroen Janssen <je...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Jeroen Janssen
> <je...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If someone can confirm that all the crash_reports are expected, then I
>> can +1 this.
>
> So-called "crashes" are similar to Unix "kill"s. They only sometimes
> match their namesake.
>
> A "crash" could be a software failure, but usually it is simply a
> component of CouchDB restarting. During the test suite, many such
> "crashes" are normal.
+1
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com>.
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Jeroen Janssen
<je...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If someone can confirm that all the crash_reports are expected, then I
> can +1 this.
So-called "crashes" are similar to Unix "kill"s. They only sometimes
match their namesake.
A "crash" could be a software failure, but usually it is simply a
component of CouchDB restarting. During the test suite, many such
"crashes" are normal.
--
Iris Couch
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Jeroen Janssen <je...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Here are my results so far.
setup-couchdb-1.2.0_otp_R15B.exe
Windows 7 x64
Google Chrome 19.0.1049.3.dev-m
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware - Avira Internet Security 2012
Test failures:
attachment_ranges
1.Assertion failed: expected '"bytes 0-28/29"', got '"bytes 0-29/29"'
2.Assertion failed: expected '"29"', got '"30"'
replicator_db
1.Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'
(I believe both of these failures are known/accepted already)
However, in my couchdb.log I see a total of 28 crash_reports happening
during the test. I don't know if this is 'expected' to happen during
the test.
I put the full couchdb logging of running the whole test suite at
http://db.tt/mcmruUSZ
If someone can confirm that all the crash_reports are expected, then I
can +1 this.
Best regards,
Jeroen Janssen
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
>
> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> tree-ish in git:
>
> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>
> And include the following 3rd party code:
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> A+
> Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Jason Smith <jh...@iriscouch.com>.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:16 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
>
> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> tree-ish in git:
>
> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>
> And include the following 3rd party code:
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
+1
Windows 7 x64
Firefox 10.XXX
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware
End-user verification OK
Futon tests pass
I tested both R15B and R14B04.
--
Iris Couch
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Over to Dave.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Andrew Hamilton
<ah...@facilityone.com>wrote:
> Yes, I was following the instructions on the wiki:
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> -Andrew Hamilton
> Project Engineer
> www.facilityone.com
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2012, at 4:12 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > Andrew, were you testing in Firefox in privacy mode with your caches
> clear?
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Andrew Hamilton
> > <ah...@facilityone.com>wrote:
> >
> >> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching
> the
> >> test suite results from couch.
> >>
> >> -1
> >> Windows 7 x64
> >> Firefox 11.0
> >> signature OK
> >> md5 & sha OK
> >> No malware
> >> End-user verification OK
> >> Futon tests failed:
> >> attachments
> >> attachment_paths
> >> config
> >> cookie_auth
> >> delayed_commits
> >> design_docs
> >> erlang views
> >> invalid_docids
> >> replicator_db
> >> view_errors
> >>
> >> -Andrew Hamilton
> >> Project Engineer
> >> www.facilityone.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Feb 24, 2012, at 1:16 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> >>> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
> >>>
> >>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> >>> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before
> the
> >>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck
> >> in!
> >>>
> >>> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
> >>>
> >>> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
> >>>
> >>> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> >>> tree-ish in git:
> >>>
> >>> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
> >>>
> >>> And include the following 3rd party code:
> >>> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> >>> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> >>> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> >>> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> >>> cURL 7.23.1
> >>> ICU 4.6.1
> >>> Inno setup 5.4.3
> >>>
> >>> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
> >>>
> >>> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
> >>>
> >>> A+
> >>> Dave
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com>.
Yes, I was following the instructions on the wiki: https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
-Andrew Hamilton
Project Engineer
www.facilityone.com
On Feb 24, 2012, at 4:12 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> Andrew, were you testing in Firefox in privacy mode with your caches clear?
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Andrew Hamilton
> <ah...@facilityone.com>wrote:
>
>> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching the
>> test suite results from couch.
>>
>> -1
>> Windows 7 x64
>> Firefox 11.0
>> signature OK
>> md5 & sha OK
>> No malware
>> End-user verification OK
>> Futon tests failed:
>> attachments
>> attachment_paths
>> config
>> cookie_auth
>> delayed_commits
>> design_docs
>> erlang views
>> invalid_docids
>> replicator_db
>> view_errors
>>
>> -Andrew Hamilton
>> Project Engineer
>> www.facilityone.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 24, 2012, at 1:16 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
>>> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
>>>
>>> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
>>> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
>>> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck
>> in!
>>>
>>> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>>>
>>> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>>>
>>> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
>>> tree-ish in git:
>>>
>>> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>>>
>>> And include the following 3rd party code:
>>> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
>>> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
>>> wxWidgets 2.8.12
>>> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
>>> cURL 7.23.1
>>> ICU 4.6.1
>>> Inno setup 5.4.3
>>>
>>> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>>>
>>> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>>>
>>> A+
>>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Andrew, were you testing in Firefox in privacy mode with your caches clear?
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Andrew Hamilton
<ah...@facilityone.com>wrote:
> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching the
> test suite results from couch.
>
> -1
> Windows 7 x64
> Firefox 11.0
> signature OK
> md5 & sha OK
> No malware
> End-user verification OK
> Futon tests failed:
> attachments
> attachment_paths
> config
> cookie_auth
> delayed_commits
> design_docs
> erlang views
> invalid_docids
> replicator_db
> view_errors
>
> -Andrew Hamilton
> Project Engineer
> www.facilityone.com
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 24, 2012, at 1:16 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> > the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
> >
> > We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> > release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> > release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck
> in!
> >
> > We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
> >
> > https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
> >
> > These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> > tree-ish in git:
> >
> > 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
> >
> > And include the following 3rd party code:
> > Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> > OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> > wxWidgets 2.8.12
> > Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> > cURL 7.23.1
> > ICU 4.6.1
> > Inno setup 5.4.3
> >
> > Please follow the test procedure before voting:
> >
> > https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
> >
> > A+
> > Dave
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 4 March 2012 00:49, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> I disagree. The old binary builds should be deleted by everyone. There is
> absolutely no reason to keep them around. The source release test procedure
> starts with a command to wipe your existing download and build directory.
>
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
>
>> On 3 March 2012 02:05, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
>> > Dave,
>> >
>> > Please leave the binaries in place, or remove them. I, myself, leave them
>> > in place. I then replace them with for the next round. Please do not use
>> > "rcX" anywhere in the release artefact name. It sends the wrong message.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>>
>> Fixed by removing them from p.a.o. They are still available in
>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/jeifcxpbtpo78ak/Snapshots/20120223/ for the
>> desperate.
>>
>> Having two binary releases with the same name is even more confusing
>> for people who have downloaded rejected builds. A better approach is
>> needed.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Dave
Wiki updated to reflect nslater's point.
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
I disagree. The old binary builds should be deleted by everyone. There is
absolutely no reason to keep them around. The source release test procedure
starts with a command to wipe your existing download and build directory.
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 11:05 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> On 3 March 2012 02:05, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> > Dave,
> >
> > Please leave the binaries in place, or remove them. I, myself, leave them
> > in place. I then replace them with for the next round. Please do not use
> > "rcX" anywhere in the release artefact name. It sends the wrong message.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> Fixed by removing them from p.a.o. They are still available in
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/jeifcxpbtpo78ak/Snapshots/20120223/ for the
> desperate.
>
> Having two binary releases with the same name is even more confusing
> for people who have downloaded rejected builds. A better approach is
> needed.
>
> Cheers
> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 3 March 2012 02:05, Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org> wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Please leave the binaries in place, or remove them. I, myself, leave them
> in place. I then replace them with for the next round. Please do not use
> "rcX" anywhere in the release artefact name. It sends the wrong message.
>
> Thanks!
Fixed by removing them from p.a.o. They are still available in
https://www.dropbox.com/s/jeifcxpbtpo78ak/Snapshots/20120223/ for the
desperate.
Having two binary releases with the same name is even more confusing
for people who have downloaded rejected builds. A better approach is
needed.
Cheers
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@tumbolia.org>.
Dave,
Please leave the binaries in place, or remove them. I, myself, leave them
in place. I then replace them with for the next round. Please do not use
"rcX" anywhere in the release artefact name. It sends the wrong message.
Thanks!
On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> We're aborting in line with the 1.2.0 source release, so I've moved
> the binaries https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/rc2/
>
> Thanks very much for your testing -- this week has been chaotic with
> our move to Vienna so I hope to get some proper couch time again next
> week.
>
> Dirkjan, Alex - any progress to share?
>
> A+
> Dave
>
> On 26 February 2012 18:46, Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Feb 25, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
> >
> >> On 24 February 2012 21:18, Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching
> the test suite results from couch.
> >>
> >> Great - ideal in fact I'd not thought of this myself :-0.
> >>
> >>> -1
> >>> Windows 7 x64
> >>> Firefox 11.0
> >>> signature OK
> >>> md5 & sha OK
> >>> No malware
> >>> End-user verification OK
> >>> Futon tests failed:
> >>> attachments
> >>> attachment_paths
> >>> config
> >>> cookie_auth
> >>> delayed_commits
> >>> design_docs
> >>> erlang views
> >>> invalid_docids
> >>> replicator_db
> >>> view_errors
> >>
> >> Looks like a combo of whitelisting not cleaning up & the same issues
> >> already reported prior.
> >>
> >> Do you want to try same steps as Jeroen (clean up var/lib/couchdb/*
> >> and any changes in local.ini, restart and run tests over LAN instead
> >> of localhost with local.ini bind_address updated appropriately?
> >>
> >> This introduces a smidgen of latency which seems to help things.
> >
> > I ran the test suite again, this time from my home over a VPN to my work
> computer. I got all tests to pass except for stats, which failed with this
> message:
> >
> > Assertion 'triggered, "We managed to force a all_dbs_active error."'
> failed: We managed to force a all_dbs_active error.
> >
> > Out of curiosity, I ran this test on localhost, and it passes just fine.
> Oh, and I forgot to mention earlier I am running the R15B version.
> >
> >>
> >> I am wondering if the issues disappear if POST _restart has a small
> >> delay introduced, I'll see if there's a nice way to do this.
> >>
> >> BTW how fast is this box you are running it on? I'm doing everything
> >> on i7 8 core or EC2 large instances. Perhaps this crops up more often
> >> on low-end VMs?
> >
> > My machine is running a Xeon E31220 @ 3.1 GHz and 8GB of RAM. It does
> seem a lot faster than even some of the servers I have previously tested on.
> >
> > I'm changing my vote to +1
> >
> >>
> >> A+
> >> Dave
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
Hey folks,
We're aborting in line with the 1.2.0 source release, so I've moved
the binaries https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/rc2/
Thanks very much for your testing -- this week has been chaotic with
our move to Vienna so I hope to get some proper couch time again next
week.
Dirkjan, Alex - any progress to share?
A+
Dave
On 26 February 2012 18:46, Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 25, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
>
>> On 24 February 2012 21:18, Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com> wrote:
>>> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching the test suite results from couch.
>>
>> Great - ideal in fact I'd not thought of this myself :-0.
>>
>>> -1
>>> Windows 7 x64
>>> Firefox 11.0
>>> signature OK
>>> md5 & sha OK
>>> No malware
>>> End-user verification OK
>>> Futon tests failed:
>>> attachments
>>> attachment_paths
>>> config
>>> cookie_auth
>>> delayed_commits
>>> design_docs
>>> erlang views
>>> invalid_docids
>>> replicator_db
>>> view_errors
>>
>> Looks like a combo of whitelisting not cleaning up & the same issues
>> already reported prior.
>>
>> Do you want to try same steps as Jeroen (clean up var/lib/couchdb/*
>> and any changes in local.ini, restart and run tests over LAN instead
>> of localhost with local.ini bind_address updated appropriately?
>>
>> This introduces a smidgen of latency which seems to help things.
>
> I ran the test suite again, this time from my home over a VPN to my work computer. I got all tests to pass except for stats, which failed with this message:
>
> Assertion 'triggered, "We managed to force a all_dbs_active error."' failed: We managed to force a all_dbs_active error.
>
> Out of curiosity, I ran this test on localhost, and it passes just fine. Oh, and I forgot to mention earlier I am running the R15B version.
>
>>
>> I am wondering if the issues disappear if POST _restart has a small
>> delay introduced, I'll see if there's a nice way to do this.
>>
>> BTW how fast is this box you are running it on? I'm doing everything
>> on i7 8 core or EC2 large instances. Perhaps this crops up more often
>> on low-end VMs?
>
> My machine is running a Xeon E31220 @ 3.1 GHz and 8GB of RAM. It does seem a lot faster than even some of the servers I have previously tested on.
>
> I'm changing my vote to +1
>
>>
>> A+
>> Dave
>
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com>.
On Feb 25, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote:
> On 24 February 2012 21:18, Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com> wrote:
>> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching the test suite results from couch.
>
> Great - ideal in fact I'd not thought of this myself :-0.
>
>> -1
>> Windows 7 x64
>> Firefox 11.0
>> signature OK
>> md5 & sha OK
>> No malware
>> End-user verification OK
>> Futon tests failed:
>> attachments
>> attachment_paths
>> config
>> cookie_auth
>> delayed_commits
>> design_docs
>> erlang views
>> invalid_docids
>> replicator_db
>> view_errors
>
> Looks like a combo of whitelisting not cleaning up & the same issues
> already reported prior.
>
> Do you want to try same steps as Jeroen (clean up var/lib/couchdb/*
> and any changes in local.ini, restart and run tests over LAN instead
> of localhost with local.ini bind_address updated appropriately?
>
> This introduces a smidgen of latency which seems to help things.
I ran the test suite again, this time from my home over a VPN to my work computer. I got all tests to pass except for stats, which failed with this message:
Assertion 'triggered, "We managed to force a all_dbs_active error."' failed: We managed to force a all_dbs_active error.
Out of curiosity, I ran this test on localhost, and it passes just fine. Oh, and I forgot to mention earlier I am running the R15B version.
>
> I am wondering if the issues disappear if POST _restart has a small
> delay introduced, I'll see if there's a nice way to do this.
>
> BTW how fast is this box you are running it on? I'm doing everything
> on i7 8 core or EC2 large instances. Perhaps this crops up more often
> on low-end VMs?
My machine is running a Xeon E31220 @ 3.1 GHz and 8GB of RAM. It does seem a lot faster than even some of the servers I have previously tested on.
I'm changing my vote to +1
>
> A+
> Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz>.
On 24 February 2012 21:18, Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com> wrote:
> Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching the test suite results from couch.
Great - ideal in fact I'd not thought of this myself :-0.
> -1
> Windows 7 x64
> Firefox 11.0
> signature OK
> md5 & sha OK
> No malware
> End-user verification OK
> Futon tests failed:
> attachments
> attachment_paths
> config
> cookie_auth
> delayed_commits
> design_docs
> erlang views
> invalid_docids
> replicator_db
> view_errors
Looks like a combo of whitelisting not cleaning up & the same issues
already reported prior.
Do you want to try same steps as Jeroen (clean up var/lib/couchdb/*
and any changes in local.ini, restart and run tests over LAN instead
of localhost with local.ini bind_address updated appropriately?
This introduces a smidgen of latency which seems to help things.
I am wondering if the issues disappear if POST _restart has a small
delay introduced, I'll see if there's a nice way to do this.
BTW how fast is this box you are running it on? I'm doing everything
on i7 8 core or EC2 large instances. Perhaps this crops up more often
on low-end VMs?
A+
Dave
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Andrew Hamilton <ah...@facilityone.com>.
Not sure if this the best way to show my error log, but I am attaching the test suite results from couch.
-1
Windows 7 x64
Firefox 11.0
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware
End-user verification OK
Futon tests failed:
attachments
attachment_paths
config
cookie_auth
delayed_commits
design_docs
erlang views
invalid_docids
replicator_db
view_errors
-Andrew Hamilton
Project Engineer
www.facilityone.com
Re: [VOTE] Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 -- Windows Binaries
Posted by Nick North <no...@gmail.com>.
Using R15B:
+1
Windows7 x64
Firefox 10.0.2
signature OK
md5 & sha OK
No malware
End-user verification OK
Futon tests failed
All passed except replicator_db, which fails in various ways both locally
and over the network, often with: Assertion failed: expected 'null', got
'{"_id":"foo666","_rev":"1-8f008c4354eb07d5fbfc399a84bc88a1","value":666}'.
But I believe this is a known timing issue so am still +1.
I'll try to test on other Windows varieties tomorrow.
Nick
On 24 February 2012 18:16, Dave Cottlehuber <da...@muse.net.nz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following Windows binaries based on
> the concurrent Apache CouchDB 1.2.0 release artefacts.
>
> We encourage the whole community to download and test these
> release artifacts so that any critical issues can be resolved before the
> release is made. Everyone is free to vote on this release, so get stuck in!
>
> We are voting on the following two binaries for R14B04 and R15B:
>
> https://people.apache.org/~dch/dist/1.2.0/
>
> These have been built using Microsoft SDK 7.1 from the following
> tree-ish in git:
>
> 4cd60f3d1683a3445c3248f48ae064fb573db2a1
>
> And include the following 3rd party code:
> Erlang R14B04 or R15B
> OpenSSL 0.9.8r
> wxWidgets 2.8.12
> Mozilla JavaScript 1.8.5
> cURL 7.23.1
> ICU 4.6.1
> Inno setup 5.4.3
>
> Please follow the test procedure before voting:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/couchdb/Windows_Binary_Releases
>
> A+
> Dave
>