You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com> on 2014/08/04 16:17:30 UTC
problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Heads up: I expect to flunk 10.11.1.0 because of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6683. I will hold off
building a new release candidate so that we'll have time to collect
other problems. In particular, I would like to see the results of the
full-spectrum platform tests. I expect to publish a new release
candidate on Wednesday. This should not affect the target release date.
Thanks,
-Rick
Re: problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Posted by Knut Anders Hatlen <kn...@oracle.com>.
mike matrigali <mi...@gmail.com> writes:
> thanks knut, definitely a good chunk of testing. Could you log a JIRA with
> what you found to fail (just a test output is fine with me) and an
> improvement request. Seems like we could improve the problem tests to
> only run if the source db is at a specific level. Would be interesting
> to do similar testing with even more back level db's.
I've filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6698 and added
the results from the test run.
Thanks,
--
Knut Anders
Re: problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Posted by mike matrigali <mi...@gmail.com>.
thanks knut, definitely a good chunk of testing. Could you log a JIRA with
what you found to fail (just a test output is fine with me) and an
improvement request. Seems like we could improve the problem tests to
only run if the source db is at a specific level. Would be interesting
to do similar testing with even more back level db's.
On 8/7/2014 4:56 AM, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
> Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com> writes:
>
>> On 8/6/14 11:37 AM, mike matrigali wrote:
>>> On 8/6/2014 10:48 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>> On 8/4/14 7:17 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>>> Heads up: I expect to flunk 10.11.1.0 because of
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6683. I will hold off
>>>>> building a new release candidate so that we'll have time to collect
>>>>> other problems. In particular, I would like to see the results of the
>>>>> full-spectrum platform tests. I expect to publish a new release
>>>>> candidate on Wednesday. This should not affect the target release date.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -Rick
>>>>>
>>>> I am pushing back the second release candidate until at least tomorrow.
>>>> I want to see the nightly platform results after checking in the fix to
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6692. In addition, Knut is
>>>> running the regression tests on a database which was created with
>>>> 10.10.2.0, in order to flush out other problems related to soft-upgrade.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Rick
>>>>
>>> Once done, could knut post how he did this? Is there just a
>>> property or is other hacking needed. I know most of the junit
>>> tests run on a single db, and maybe that is all he is going after.
>> I believe that's his approach. He's running the tests in a directory
>> which already has a wombat database created by 10.10.2.0.
>
> That's right. I was reusing some scripts that I had used when running
> 10.10.2.0 release tests earlier, and accidentally also reused the old
> databases that were still lying around. That's how I tripped across
> DERBY-6692.
>
>> Thanks,
>> -Rick
>>> I dont know how to
>>> deal with those that need their own separate db.
>
> I don't know either. Most tests use system/wombat though, so I think it
> gives pretty good coverage.
>
> I reran suites.All on a soft-upgraded database with head of 10.11 +
> Rick's patch for DERBY-6692.
>
> Now all the self-deadlocks are gone. There are still 21 failures and 68
> errors when you run the tests this way. As far as I can tell, all of the
> failures and errors are expected. I saw the following classes of errors:
>
> - Use of the WHEN clause in triggers (not supported unless you upgrade
> the database)
>
> - Use of deferred constraints (not supported unless you upgrade the
> database)
>
> - Use of identity columns (expected new behaviour, got old behaviour)
>
> - Checks of meta-data and system tables which expected the new
> SYSCS_PEEK_AT_IDENTITY procedure to exist
>
> No alarming results, so we're good to go from this perspective.
>
> Thanks,
>
Re: problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Posted by Knut Anders Hatlen <kn...@oracle.com>.
Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com> writes:
> On 8/6/14 11:37 AM, mike matrigali wrote:
>> On 8/6/2014 10:48 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>> On 8/4/14 7:17 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>> Heads up: I expect to flunk 10.11.1.0 because of
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6683. I will hold off
>>>> building a new release candidate so that we'll have time to collect
>>>> other problems. In particular, I would like to see the results of the
>>>> full-spectrum platform tests. I expect to publish a new release
>>>> candidate on Wednesday. This should not affect the target release date.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Rick
>>>>
>>> I am pushing back the second release candidate until at least tomorrow.
>>> I want to see the nightly platform results after checking in the fix to
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6692. In addition, Knut is
>>> running the regression tests on a database which was created with
>>> 10.10.2.0, in order to flush out other problems related to soft-upgrade.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Rick
>>>
>> Once done, could knut post how he did this? Is there just a
>> property or is other hacking needed. I know most of the junit
>> tests run on a single db, and maybe that is all he is going after.
> I believe that's his approach. He's running the tests in a directory
> which already has a wombat database created by 10.10.2.0.
That's right. I was reusing some scripts that I had used when running
10.10.2.0 release tests earlier, and accidentally also reused the old
databases that were still lying around. That's how I tripped across
DERBY-6692.
> Thanks,
> -Rick
>> I dont know how to
>> deal with those that need their own separate db.
I don't know either. Most tests use system/wombat though, so I think it
gives pretty good coverage.
I reran suites.All on a soft-upgraded database with head of 10.11 +
Rick's patch for DERBY-6692.
Now all the self-deadlocks are gone. There are still 21 failures and 68
errors when you run the tests this way. As far as I can tell, all of the
failures and errors are expected. I saw the following classes of errors:
- Use of the WHEN clause in triggers (not supported unless you upgrade
the database)
- Use of deferred constraints (not supported unless you upgrade the
database)
- Use of identity columns (expected new behaviour, got old behaviour)
- Checks of meta-data and system tables which expected the new
SYSCS_PEEK_AT_IDENTITY procedure to exist
No alarming results, so we're good to go from this perspective.
Thanks,
--
Knut Anders
Re: problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Posted by Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com>.
On 8/6/14 11:37 AM, mike matrigali wrote:
> On 8/6/2014 10:48 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>> On 8/4/14 7:17 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>> Heads up: I expect to flunk 10.11.1.0 because of
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6683. I will hold off
>>> building a new release candidate so that we'll have time to collect
>>> other problems. In particular, I would like to see the results of the
>>> full-spectrum platform tests. I expect to publish a new release
>>> candidate on Wednesday. This should not affect the target release date.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Rick
>>>
>> I am pushing back the second release candidate until at least tomorrow.
>> I want to see the nightly platform results after checking in the fix to
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6692. In addition, Knut is
>> running the regression tests on a database which was created with
>> 10.10.2.0, in order to flush out other problems related to soft-upgrade.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Rick
>>
> Once done, could knut post how he did this? Is there just a property
> or is other hacking needed. I know most of the junit tests run on a
> single db, and maybe that is all he is going after.
I believe that's his approach. He's running the tests in a directory
which already has a wombat database created by 10.10.2.0.
Thanks,
-Rick
> I dont know how to
> deal with those that need their own separate db.
>
> /mikem
>
Re: problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Posted by mike matrigali <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 8/6/2014 10:48 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
> On 8/4/14 7:17 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
>> Heads up: I expect to flunk 10.11.1.0 because of
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6683. I will hold off
>> building a new release candidate so that we'll have time to collect
>> other problems. In particular, I would like to see the results of the
>> full-spectrum platform tests. I expect to publish a new release
>> candidate on Wednesday. This should not affect the target release date.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Rick
>>
> I am pushing back the second release candidate until at least tomorrow.
> I want to see the nightly platform results after checking in the fix to
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6692. In addition, Knut is
> running the regression tests on a database which was created with
> 10.10.2.0, in order to flush out other problems related to soft-upgrade.
>
> Thanks,
> -Rick
>
Once done, could knut post how he did this? Is there just a property or
is other hacking needed. I know most of the junit tests run on a
single db, and maybe that is all he is going after. I dont know how to
deal with those that need their own separate db.
/mikem
Re: problems with the 10.11.1.0 release candidate
Posted by Rick Hillegas <ri...@oracle.com>.
On 8/4/14 7:17 AM, Rick Hillegas wrote:
> Heads up: I expect to flunk 10.11.1.0 because of
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6683. I will hold off
> building a new release candidate so that we'll have time to collect
> other problems. In particular, I would like to see the results of the
> full-spectrum platform tests. I expect to publish a new release
> candidate on Wednesday. This should not affect the target release date.
>
> Thanks,
> -Rick
>
I am pushing back the second release candidate until at least tomorrow.
I want to see the nightly platform results after checking in the fix to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6692. In addition, Knut is
running the regression tests on a database which was created with
10.10.2.0, in order to flush out other problems related to soft-upgrade.
Thanks,
-Rick