You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl> on 2009/12/28 20:06:01 UTC
Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: OpenEJB - OpenEJB -
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Continuum@vmbuild.apache.org
<co...@apache.org> wrote:
> Online report : http://vmbuild.apache.org/continuum/buildResult.action?buildId=263110&projectId=358
>
> Build statistics:
> State: Failed
> Previous State: Building
> Started at: Sun 27 Dec 2009 13:34:53 -0800
> Finished at: Sun 27 Dec 2009 14:07:52 -0800
> Total time: 32m 58s
> Build Trigger: Schedule
> Build Number: 1350
> Exit code: 1
> Building machine hostname: vmbuild.apache.org
> Operating system : Linux(unknown)
> Java Home version :
> java version "1.5.0_12"
> Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.5.0_12-b04)
> Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.5.0_12-b04, mixed mode, sharing)
>
> Builder version :
> Maven version: 2.0.9
> Java version: 1.5.0_12
> OS name: "linux" version: "2.6.24-23-server" arch: "i386" Family: "unix"
>
> ****************************************************************************
> SCM Changes:
> ****************************************************************************
> No files changed
>
> ****************************************************************************
> Dependencies Changes:
> ****************************************************************************
> No dependencies changed
>
>
> ****************************************************************************
> Build Definition:
> ****************************************************************************
> POM filename: pom.xml
> Goals: clean install -Dassemble
> Arguments: --batch-mode
> Build Fresh: true
> Always Build: false
> Default Build Definition: true
> Schedule: DEFAULT_SCHEDULE
> Profile Name: Java 5, Large Memory
> Description:
>
> ****************************************************************************
> Test Summary:
> ****************************************************************************
> Tests: 3171
> Failures: 1
> Errors: 1
> Success Rate: 99
> Total time: 821.2108
>
> ****************************************************************************
> Test Failures:
> ****************************************************************************
>
> SingletonLazyInstantiationTest
> testSuccess :
> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: expected:<1> but was:<0>
> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47)
> at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:277)
> at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:64)
> at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:195)
> at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:201)
> at org.apache.openejb.core.singleton.SingletonLazyInstantiationTest.testSuccess(SingletonLazyInstantiationTest.java:86)
It drives me crazy as I haven't been able to hunt it down on my mac.
It just works (TM) I work with the mvn 2.2.0 and java6 so it could be
why it doesn't fail for me, but it could also be something else. Does
anyone experience the issue reported by Continuum? I don't. How can we
go about it?
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
Notatnik Projektanta Java EE - http://wszystkojawne.pl
p.s. Szukam speca/firmy od grafiki/CSS/HTML
Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: OpenEJB - OpenEJB -
Posted by "Daniel S. Haischt" <da...@googlemail.com>.
FYI:
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] BUILD SUCCESSFUL
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Total time: 28 minutes 1 second
[INFO] Finished at: Tue Dec 29 02:14:43 CET 2009
[INFO] Final Memory: 263M/424M
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is rev 894287
On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 2:16 AM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com>wrote:
>
> On Dec 29, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Daniel S. Haischt wrote:
>
> btw the buildbot status page URL is:
>> http://ci.apache.org/builders/openejb-trunk/
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Jacek Laskowski <jacek@laskowski.net.pl
>> >wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:32 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Going to see if I can't add more checks in the test case in some way and
>>>> maybe drive out some more information.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wish I could help with it, but have no idea how. Looking for
>>> low-hanging fruits and thought it could be one, but I couldn't have
>>> been mistaken more :(
>>>
>>
> I figured it out after jamming all the system.out statements in there.
> Basically we never got finished creating all the "client" threads within
> the allowed 20 seconds. The test is setup so that all the threads will
> 'await' on a CyclicBarrier till everyone has reported in and is ready to go
> -- i.e. all the runners are at the starting line. There were simply too
> many "runners" for the machine to create in the 20 seconds allowed.
>
> That can happen really with any setting, so rather than just lower the
> number of threads (runners) or increase the timeout, I fixed the test so
> that it *should* brake more obviously if this condition occurs again, which
> it could easily since it's largely dependent on machine speed. Hopefully
> continuum will show the failure with a better stack trace now. I basically
> just made it so the main test thread also waits on the CyclicBarrier (the
> starting pistol), which seems completely obvious to me now, but of course
> that's the way it goes :)
>
> Anyway, I'll lower the thread count tomorrow on that test if all breaks as
> expected.
>
> -David
>
>
Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: OpenEJB - OpenEJB -
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Dec 29, 2009, at 12:59 AM, Daniel S. Haischt wrote:
> btw the buildbot status page URL is:
> http://ci.apache.org/builders/openejb-trunk/
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Jacek Laskowski <jacek@laskowski.net.pl
> >wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:32 PM, David Blevins <david.blevins@visi.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Going to see if I can't add more checks in the test case in some
>>> way and
>>> maybe drive out some more information.
>>
>> I wish I could help with it, but have no idea how. Looking for
>> low-hanging fruits and thought it could be one, but I couldn't have
>> been mistaken more :(
I figured it out after jamming all the system.out statements in
there. Basically we never got finished creating all the "client"
threads within the allowed 20 seconds. The test is setup so that all
the threads will 'await' on a CyclicBarrier till everyone has reported
in and is ready to go -- i.e. all the runners are at the starting
line. There were simply too many "runners" for the machine to create
in the 20 seconds allowed.
That can happen really with any setting, so rather than just lower the
number of threads (runners) or increase the timeout, I fixed the test
so that it *should* brake more obviously if this condition occurs
again, which it could easily since it's largely dependent on machine
speed. Hopefully continuum will show the failure with a better stack
trace now. I basically just made it so the main test thread also
waits on the CyclicBarrier (the starting pistol), which seems
completely obvious to me now, but of course that's the way it goes :)
Anyway, I'll lower the thread count tomorrow on that test if all
breaks as expected.
-David
Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: OpenEJB - OpenEJB -
Posted by "Daniel S. Haischt" <da...@googlemail.com>.
btw the buildbot status page URL is:
http://ci.apache.org/builders/openejb-trunk/
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:32 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Going to see if I can't add more checks in the test case in some way and
> > maybe drive out some more information.
>
> I wish I could help with it, but have no idea how. Looking for
> low-hanging fruits and thought it could be one, but I couldn't have
> been mistaken more :(
>
> Jacek
>
> --
> Jacek Laskowski
> Notatnik Projektanta Java EE - http://wszystkojawne.pl
> p.s. Szukam speca/firmy od grafiki/CSS/HTML
>
Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: OpenEJB - OpenEJB -
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <ja...@laskowski.net.pl>.
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 9:32 PM, David Blevins <da...@visi.com> wrote:
> Going to see if I can't add more checks in the test case in some way and
> maybe drive out some more information.
I wish I could help with it, but have no idea how. Looking for
low-hanging fruits and thought it could be one, but I couldn't have
been mistaken more :(
Jacek
--
Jacek Laskowski
Notatnik Projektanta Java EE - http://wszystkojawne.pl
p.s. Szukam speca/firmy od grafiki/CSS/HTML
Re: [continuum] BUILD FAILURE: OpenEJB - OpenEJB -
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
On Dec 28, 2009, at 8:06 PM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Continuum@vmbuild.apache.org
> <co...@apache.org> wrote:
>> SingletonLazyInstantiationTest
>> testSuccess :
>> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError
>> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: expected:<1> but was:<0>
>> at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47)
>> at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:277)
>> at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:64)
>> at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:195)
>> at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:201)
>> at
>> org
>> .apache
>> .openejb
>> .core
>> .singleton
>> .SingletonLazyInstantiationTest
>> .testSuccess(SingletonLazyInstantiationTest.java:86)
>
> It drives me crazy as I haven't been able to hunt it down on my mac.
> It just works (TM) I work with the mvn 2.2.0 and java6 so it could be
> why it doesn't fail for me, but it could also be something else. Does
> anyone experience the issue reported by Continuum? I don't. How can we
> go about it?
Was just noticing that the other day as well. It also drives me crazy
as this test should never fail.
Going to see if I can't add more checks in the test case in some way
and maybe drive out some more information.
-David