You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@zookeeper.apache.org by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> on 2016/07/03 08:54:14 UTC
RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Hey Eddie,
A few comments on your points:
> On 02 Jul 2016, at 23:54, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> - built ZK from source
> - ran all the unit tests
> - generated and checked javadocs
> - generated and checked docs
> - executed few manual test (zkCli.sh) and 4lw
>
> Some small issues (imho):
>
> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth updating to
> the current year?
Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can see.
> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
> - Also this one:
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>
I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create one and make it a blocker.
> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them related
> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>
>
In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or make sure that there are jiras for it.
Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
-Flavio
> Regards,
> Eddie
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <
> rakeshr.apache@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> - built zookeeper jar from source,
>> - ran unit test cases, few zkCli commands, few four letter words,
>> - tested few scenarios against Hadoop-2.7.2 version(3 node Kerberos secure
>> cluster environment).
>>
>> Thanks Chris for making the release.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Rakesh
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> - Checked license information
>>> - Ran RAT tool
>>> - Ran tests
>>> - Ran some smoke tests
>>> - Verified digests and signature
>>> - Checked release notes
>>>
>>> All of the above LGTM
>>>
>>> -Flavio
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 01 Jul 2016, at 08:45, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is a release candidate for 3.5.2-alpha. The full release notes are
>>>> available at:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310801&v
>>>> ersion=12331981
>>>>
>>>> *** Please download, test and vote by July 5th 2016, 23:59 UTC+0. ***
>>>>
>>>> Source files:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~cnauroth/zookeeper-3.5.2-alpha-candidate-1/
>>>>
>>>> Maven staging repo:
>>>>
>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/zookeeper/z
>>>> ookeeper/3.5.2-alpha/
>>>>
>>>> The tag to be voted upon:
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3.5.2-rc1/
>>>>
>>>> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS
>>>>
>>>> Should we release this candidate?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --Chris Nauroth
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release
3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>.
Sorry for the confusion. This [VOTE] is still under way, so please do
review the RC and vote.
The summary of this side discussion is that no one (yet) sees the issues
flagged as blockers for the 3.5.2-alpha release. No one yet has decided
to vote -1.
--Chris Nauroth
On 7/5/16, 4:26 PM, "Camille Fournier" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
>Is this RC still under vote or is it pulled? It's hard to tell with these
>threads what I should be looking for when evaluating it.
>
>On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I filed ZOOKEEPER-2465 to track updating the copyright notice on all
>> documentation pages. Edward, thank you for reporting the problem.
>>
>> --Chris Nauroth
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/3/16, 12:02 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >> For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before
>>starting
>> >>the
>> >> [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could
>>have
>> >> snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
>> >> ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who
>>are
>> >> trying RC1.
>> >
>> >The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
>> >haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
>> >timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem
>>to
>> >indicate a regression or anything.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
>> >>notice
>> >> in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in
>>the
>> >> same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
>> >> address it in 3.5.3.
>> >
>> >Agreed, we need an issue for that.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the
>>ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
>> >> failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
>> >>
>> >
>> >I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
>> >3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>> >
>> >> Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point?
>>Is
>> >> anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
>> >> alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
>> >> cycle?
>> >
>> >I'd say we proceed.
>> >
>> >-Flavio
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port
>>is
>> >>> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server
>>from
>> >>> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry
>>and
>> >>> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
>> >>>
>> >>> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
>> >>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
>> >>>
>> >>> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have
>> >>>created
>> >>> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Flavio
>> >>>
>> >>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
>> >>>> failures with the new installation:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed
>> >>>>10911
>> >>>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
>> >>>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
>> >>>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
>> >>>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
>> >>>> Failures !!!
>> >>>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
>> >>>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
>> >>>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
>> >>>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
>> >>>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
>> >>>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str())
>>==
>> >>>>0'
>> >>>> failed.
>> >>>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
>> >>>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
>> >>>> ${dir}$tst
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Flavio
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro
>><ed...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Hi Flavio,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
>> >>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >>>>> Hey Eddie,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> A few comments on your points:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
>> >>>>>> updating to
>> >>>>>> the current year?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I
>>can
>> >>>>> see.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
>> >>>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
>> >>>>> copyright. Images attached.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>> >>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>> >>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>> >>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>> >>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
>> >>>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Got it. :)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - Also this one:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%
>> >>>>>>3C
>> >>>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>><
>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/
>> >>>>>>%3
>> >>>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better
>>create
>> >>>>> one and make it a blocker.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of
>>them
>> >>>>>> related
>> >>>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
>> >>>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report
>>them
>> >>>>>or
>> >>>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the
>>unit
>> >>>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java
>> >>>>>1.7.
>> >>>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make
>>sure it
>> >>>>> was not a false negative.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad
>>with
>> >>>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It
>> >>>>>might
>> >>>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are
>>restricted
>> >>>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
>> >>>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Edward
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha
candidate 1)
Posted by Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>.
Is this RC still under vote or is it pulled? It's hard to tell with these
threads what I should be looking for when evaluating it.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:
> I filed ZOOKEEPER-2465 to track updating the copyright notice on all
> documentation pages. Edward, thank you for reporting the problem.
>
> --Chris Nauroth
>
>
>
>
> On 7/3/16, 12:02 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting
> >>the
> >> [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
> >> snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
> >> ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
> >> trying RC1.
> >
> >The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
> >haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
> >timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to
> >indicate a regression or anything.
> >
> >>
> >> It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
> >>notice
> >> in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
> >> same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
> >> address it in 3.5.3.
> >
> >Agreed, we need an issue for that.
> >
> >>
> >> Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
> >> failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
> >>
> >
> >I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
> >3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
> >
> >> Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
> >> anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
> >> alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
> >> cycle?
> >
> >I'd say we proceed.
> >
> >-Flavio
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
> >>> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
> >>> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry and
> >>> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
> >>>
> >>> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
> >>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
> >>>
> >>> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have
> >>>created
> >>> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
> >>>
> >>> -Flavio
> >>>
> >>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
> >>>> failures with the new installation:
> >>>>
> >>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed
> >>>>10911
> >>>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
> >>>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
> >>>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
> >>>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
> >>>> Failures !!!
> >>>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
> >>>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
> >>>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
> >>>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
> >>>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
> >>>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) ==
> >>>>0'
> >>>> failed.
> >>>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
> >>>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
> >>>> ${dir}$tst
> >>>>
> >>>> -Flavio
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Flavio,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
> >>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>>> Hey Eddie,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A few comments on your points:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
> >>>>>> updating to
> >>>>>> the current year?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can
> >>>>> see.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
> >>>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
> >>>>> copyright. Images attached.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
> >>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
> >>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
> >>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
> >>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
> >>>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Got it. :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> - Also this one:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%
> >>>>>>3C
> >>>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>><
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/
> >>>>>>%3
> >>>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
> >>>>> one and make it a blocker.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
> >>>>>> related
> >>>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
> >>>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them
> >>>>>or
> >>>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
> >>>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java
> >>>>>1.7.
> >>>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it
> >>>>> was not a false negative.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
> >>>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It
> >>>>>might
> >>>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
> >>>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
> >>>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Edward
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release
3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>.
I filed ZOOKEEPER-2465 to track updating the copyright notice on all
documentation pages. Edward, thank you for reporting the problem.
--Chris Nauroth
On 7/3/16, 12:02 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>> For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting
>>the
>> [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
>> snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
>> ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
>> trying RC1.
>
>The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
>haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
>timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to
>indicate a regression or anything.
>
>>
>> It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
>>notice
>> in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
>> same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
>> address it in 3.5.3.
>
>Agreed, we need an issue for that.
>
>>
>> Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
>> failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
>>
>
>I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
>3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>
>> Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
>> anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
>> alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
>> cycle?
>
>I'd say we proceed.
>
>-Flavio
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
>>> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
>>> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry and
>>> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
>>>
>>> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
>>>
>>> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have
>>>created
>>> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
>>>
>>> -Flavio
>>>
>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
>>>> failures with the new installation:
>>>>
>>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed
>>>>10911
>>>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
>>>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
>>>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
>>>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
>>>> Failures !!!
>>>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
>>>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
>>>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
>>>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
>>>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
>>>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) ==
>>>>0'
>>>> failed.
>>>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
>>>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
>>>> ${dir}$tst
>>>>
>>>> -Flavio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Flavio,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>> Hey Eddie,
>>>>>
>>>>> A few comments on your points:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
>>>>>> updating to
>>>>>> the current year?
>>>>>
>>>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can
>>>>> see.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
>>>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
>>>>> copyright. Images attached.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
>>>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>>>>>
>>>>> Got it. :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - Also this one:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%
>>>>>>3C
>>>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>>>>>>
>>>>>><https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/
>>>>>>%3
>>>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
>>>>> one and make it a blocker.
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
>>>>>> related
>>>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
>>>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them
>>>>>or
>>>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
>>>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java
>>>>>1.7.
>>>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it
>>>>> was not a false negative.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
>>>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It
>>>>>might
>>>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>>>>>
>>>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
>>>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
>>>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Edward
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
I forgot to fill in the name of the test giving the connection errors below, it is testFirstServerDown in Zookeeper_simpleSystem (TestClient.cc <http://testclient.cc/>).
-Flavio
> On 04 Jul 2016, at 23:53, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 04 Jul 2016, at 22:01, Michael Han <hanm@cloudera.com <ma...@cloudera.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Both Java and C unit tests coming with 3.5.2-alpha passed for me in 5 runs.
>> Are the failed tests deterministically reproducible?
>
> They fail consistently for me. When I run xxx, I get this output in the logs, which is weird because it looks like the client is trying 127.0.0.1:22181 only once and after that it only tries 127.0.0.1:22182, it sounds wrong to me:
>
> 016-07-04 15:04:08,523:33750:ZOO_INFO@zookeeper_init_internal@1111: Initiating client connection, host=127.0.0.1:22182,127.0.0.1:22181 sessionTimeout=10000 watcher=0x447050 sessionId=0 sessionPasswd=<null> context=0x7fff8e504910 flags=0
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22181] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,524:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> 2016-07-04 15:04:09,524:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
> <This line keeps repeating until the test times out>
>
> Also, if you check ZK-2463, it looks like the multi tests are failing silently. They are timing out, but the framework isn't picking it up. I haven't had a chance to look at these multi tests to determine whether it is timing or what.
>
>> If not, it seems we
>> have more flaky tests related to threading / timing that needs to be taken
>> care of, and they don't sound blocker for the release to me.
>>
>
> From what I can tell, none of these issues are new, so I have no reason to suspect that an issue we resolved for 3.5.2 is introducing these problems. If we are to be strict, then we cannot release it, but I'd say we benefit from it still being alpha and proceed. We are solving a number of issue that it is good to have out. For 3.5.3, I think we really need to spend some time on the C client.
>
> -Flavio
>
>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <ra...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
>>> 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>>>
>>> Since the current release is alpha I also feel its OK to go ahead with RC1
>>> and address the C client issue in 3.5.3. That way we'll get more folks
>>> trying it out and stabilize 3.5 version eventually. Probably will listen to
>>> others opinion as well.
>>>
>>> -Rakesh
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting
>>>> the
>>>>> [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
>>>>> snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
>>>>> ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
>>>>> trying RC1.
>>>>
>>>> The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
>>>> haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
>>>> timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to
>>>> indicate a regression or anything.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
>>>> notice
>>>>> in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
>>>>> same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
>>>>> address it in 3.5.3.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed, we need an issue for that.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
>>>>> failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
>>>> 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>>>>
>>>>> Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
>>>>> anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
>>>>> alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
>>>>> cycle?
>>>>
>>>> I'd say we proceed.
>>>>
>>>> -Flavio
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
>>>>>> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
>>>>>> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry
>>> and
>>>>>> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
>>>>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have
>>> created
>>>>>> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Flavio
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
>>>>>>> failures with the new installation:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed
>>> 10911
>>>>>>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
>>>>>>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
>>>>>>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
>>>>>>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
>>>>>>> Failures !!!
>>>>>>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
>>>>>>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
>>>>>>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
>>>>>>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
>>>>>>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
>>>>>>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) ==
>>>> 0'
>>>>>>> failed.
>>>>>>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
>>>>>>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
>>>>>>> ${dir}$tst
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Flavio
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Flavio,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
>>>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey Eddie,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A few comments on your points:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
>>>>>>>>> updating to
>>>>>>>>> the current year?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I
>>> can
>>>>>>>> see.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
>>>>>>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
>>>>>>>> copyright. Images attached.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>>>>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>>>>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>>>>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>>>>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
>>>>>>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Got it. :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - Also this one:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C <https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C>
>>>>>>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>>>>>>>>> <
>>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3 <https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3>
>>>>>>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
>>>>>>>> one and make it a blocker.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
>>>>>>>>> related
>>>>>>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
>>>>>>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them
>>> or
>>>>>>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
>>>>>>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java
>>> 1.7.
>>>>>>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure
>>> it
>>>>>>>> was not a false negative.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
>>>>>>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It
>>> might
>>>>>>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
>>>>>>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
>>>>>>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Edward
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Michael.
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
> On 04 Jul 2016, at 22:01, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> Both Java and C unit tests coming with 3.5.2-alpha passed for me in 5 runs.
> Are the failed tests deterministically reproducible?
They fail consistently for me. When I run xxx, I get this output in the logs, which is weird because it looks like the client is trying 127.0.0.1:22181 only once and after that it only tries 127.0.0.1:22182, it sounds wrong to me:
016-07-04 15:04:08,523:33750:ZOO_INFO@zookeeper_init_internal@1111: Initiating client connection, host=127.0.0.1:22182,127.0.0.1:22181 sessionTimeout=10000 watcher=0x447050 sessionId=0 sessionPasswd=<null> context=0x7fff8e504910 flags=0
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22181] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,523:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,524:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
2016-07-04 15:04:09,524:33750:ZOO_ERROR@handle_socket_error_msg@2350: Socket [127.0.0.1:22182] zk retcode=-4, errno=111(Connection refused): server refused to accept the client
<This line keeps repeating until the test times out>
Also, if you check ZK-2463, it looks like the multi tests are failing silently. They are timing out, but the framework isn't picking it up. I haven't had a chance to look at these multi tests to determine whether it is timing or what.
> If not, it seems we
> have more flaky tests related to threading / timing that needs to be taken
> care of, and they don't sound blocker for the release to me.
>
From what I can tell, none of these issues are new, so I have no reason to suspect that an issue we resolved for 3.5.2 is introducing these problems. If we are to be strict, then we cannot release it, but I'd say we benefit from it still being alpha and proceed. We are solving a number of issue that it is good to have out. For 3.5.3, I think we really need to spend some time on the C client.
-Flavio
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <ra...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>>>> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
>> 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>>
>> Since the current release is alpha I also feel its OK to go ahead with RC1
>> and address the C client issue in 3.5.3. That way we'll get more folks
>> trying it out and stabilize 3.5 version eventually. Probably will listen to
>> others opinion as well.
>>
>> -Rakesh
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting
>>> the
>>>> [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
>>>> snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
>>>> ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
>>>> trying RC1.
>>>
>>> The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
>>> haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
>>> timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to
>>> indicate a regression or anything.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
>>> notice
>>>> in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
>>>> same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
>>>> address it in 3.5.3.
>>>
>>> Agreed, we need an issue for that.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
>>>> failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
>>> 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>>>
>>>> Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
>>>> anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
>>>> alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
>>>> cycle?
>>>
>>> I'd say we proceed.
>>>
>>> -Flavio
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
>>>>> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
>>>>> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry
>> and
>>>>> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
>>>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have
>> created
>>>>> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Flavio
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
>>>>>> failures with the new installation:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed
>> 10911
>>>>>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
>>>>>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
>>>>>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
>>>>>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
>>>>>> Failures !!!
>>>>>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
>>>>>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
>>>>>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
>>>>>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
>>>>>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
>>>>>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) ==
>>> 0'
>>>>>> failed.
>>>>>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
>>>>>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
>>>>>> ${dir}$tst
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Flavio
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Flavio,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
>>>>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hey Eddie,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A few comments on your points:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
>>>>>>>> updating to
>>>>>>>> the current year?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I
>> can
>>>>>>> see.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
>>>>>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
>>>>>>> copyright. Images attached.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>>>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>>>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
>>>>>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Got it. :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Also this one:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C
>>>>>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>>>>>>>> <
>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3
>>>>>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
>>>>>>> one and make it a blocker.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
>>>>>>>> related
>>>>>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
>>>>>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them
>> or
>>>>>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
>>>>>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java
>> 1.7.
>>>>>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure
>> it
>>>>>>> was not a false negative.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
>>>>>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It
>> might
>>>>>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
>>>>>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
>>>>>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Edward
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha
candidate 1)
Posted by Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>.
Both Java and C unit tests coming with 3.5.2-alpha passed for me in 5 runs.
Are the failed tests deterministically reproducible? If not, it seems we
have more flaky tests related to threading / timing that needs to be taken
care of, and they don't sound blocker for the release to me.
On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <ra...@apache.org>
wrote:
> >> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
> 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>
> Since the current release is alpha I also feel its OK to go ahead with RC1
> and address the C client issue in 3.5.3. That way we'll get more folks
> trying it out and stabilize 3.5 version eventually. Probably will listen to
> others opinion as well.
>
> -Rakesh
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
> > > On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting
> > the
> > > [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
> > > snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
> > > ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
> > > trying RC1.
> >
> > The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
> > haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
> > timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to
> > indicate a regression or anything.
> >
> > >
> > > It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
> > notice
> > > in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
> > > same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
> > > address it in 3.5.3.
> >
> > Agreed, we need an issue for that.
> >
> > >
> > > Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
> > > failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
> > >
> >
> > I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
> > 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
> >
> > > Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
> > > anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
> > > alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
> > > cycle?
> >
> > I'd say we proceed.
> >
> > -Flavio
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
> > >> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
> > >> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry
> and
> > >> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
> > >>
> > >> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
> > >> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
> > >>
> > >> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have
> created
> > >> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
> > >>
> > >> -Flavio
> > >>
> > >>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
> > >>> failures with the new installation:
> > >>>
> > >>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed
> 10911
> > >>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
> > >>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
> > >>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
> > >>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
> > >>> Failures !!!
> > >>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
> > >>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
> > >>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
> > >>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
> > >>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
> > >>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) ==
> > 0'
> > >>> failed.
> > >>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
> > >>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
> > >>> ${dir}$tst
> > >>>
> > >>> -Flavio
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Flavio,
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
> > >>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>>> Hey Eddie,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> A few comments on your points:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
> > >>>>> updating to
> > >>>>> the current year?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I
> can
> > >>>> see.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
> > >>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
> > >>>> copyright. Images attached.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
> > >>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
> > >>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
> > >>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
> > >>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
> > >>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Got it. :)
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> - Also this one:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C
> > >>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
> > >>>>> <
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3
> > >>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
> > >>>> one and make it a blocker.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
> > >>>>> related
> > >>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
> > >>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them
> or
> > >>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
> > >>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java
> 1.7.
> > >>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure
> it
> > >>>> was not a false negative.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
> > >>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It
> might
> > >>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
> > >>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
> > >>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Edward
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
--
Cheers
Michael.
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha
candidate 1)
Posted by Rakesh Radhakrishnan <ra...@apache.org>.
>> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
Since the current release is alpha I also feel its OK to go ahead with RC1
and address the C client issue in 3.5.3. That way we'll get more folks
trying it out and stabilize 3.5 version eventually. Probably will listen to
others opinion as well.
-Rakesh
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:32 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting
> the
> > [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
> > snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
> > ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
> > trying RC1.
>
> The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I
> haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that
> timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to
> indicate a regression or anything.
>
> >
> > It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright
> notice
> > in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
> > same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
> > address it in 3.5.3.
>
> Agreed, we need an issue for that.
>
> >
> > Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
> > failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
> >
>
> I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with
> 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
>
> > Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
> > anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
> > alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
> > cycle?
>
> I'd say we proceed.
>
> -Flavio
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
> >> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
> >> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry and
> >> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
> >>
> >> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
> >> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
> >>
> >> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have created
> >> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
> >>
> >> -Flavio
> >>
> >>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
> >>> failures with the new installation:
> >>>
> >>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed 10911
> >>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
> >>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
> >>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
> >>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
> >>> Failures !!!
> >>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
> >>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
> >>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
> >>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
> >>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
> >>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) ==
> 0'
> >>> failed.
> >>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
> >>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
> >>> ${dir}$tst
> >>>
> >>> -Flavio
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Flavio,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
> >>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>> Hey Eddie,
> >>>>
> >>>> A few comments on your points:
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
> >>>>> updating to
> >>>>> the current year?
> >>>>
> >>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can
> >>>> see.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
> >>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
> >>>> copyright. Images attached.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
> >>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
> >>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
> >>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
> >>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
> >>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
> >>>>
> >>>> Got it. :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> - Also this one:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C
> >>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
> >>>>> <
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3
> >>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
> >>>> one and make it a blocker.
> >>>>
> >>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
> >>>>> related
> >>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
> >>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or
> >>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
> >>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java 1.7.
> >>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it
> >>>> was not a false negative.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
> >>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might
> >>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
> >>>>
> >>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
> >>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
> >>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
> >>>>
> >>>> Edward
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
> On 03 Jul 2016, at 17:53, Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting the
> [VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
> snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
> ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
> trying RC1.
The test failures seem to be related to test timing, not bugs, but I haven't been able to confirm for the last two I mentioned. Granted that timing is in some sense a bug, all I'm saying is that it doesn't seem to indicate a regression or anything.
>
> It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright notice
> in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
> same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
> address it in 3.5.3.
Agreed, we need an issue for that.
>
> Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
> failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
>
I'm suggesting as a blocker for 3.5.3, I think we should proceed with 3.5.2 as is and give some love to the C client in the next release.
> Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
> anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
> alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
> cycle?
I'd say we proceed.
-Flavio
>
>
>
> On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
>> still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
>> starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry and
>> it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
>>
>> I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
>>
>> I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have created
>> ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
>>
>> -Flavio
>>
>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
>>> failures with the new installation:
>>>
>>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed 10911
>>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
>>> [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
>>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
>>> ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
>>> Failures !!!
>>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
>>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
>>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
>>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
>>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
>>> ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) == 0'
>>> failed.
>>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
>>> ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
>>> ${dir}$tst
>>>
>>> -Flavio
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Flavio,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
>>>> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>> Hey Eddie,
>>>>
>>>> A few comments on your points:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
>>>>> updating to
>>>>> the current year?
>>>>
>>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can
>>>> see.
>>>>
>>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
>>>> folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
>>>> copyright. Images attached.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>>> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>>>>
>>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
>>>> though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>>>>
>>>> Got it. :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - Also this one:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C
>>>>> 1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>>>>> <https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3
>>>>> C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
>>>> one and make it a blocker.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
>>>>> related
>>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
>>>> didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or
>>>> make sure that there are jiras for it.
>>>>
>>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
>>>> tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java 1.7.
>>>> So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it
>>>> was not a false negative.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
>>>> the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might
>>>> be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>>>>
>>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
>>>> to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
>>>> researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>>>>
>>>> Edward
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release
3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Chris Nauroth <cn...@hortonworks.com>.
For my part, I got a successful full test run from RC1 before starting the
[VOTE]. The problem with the silent failure of multi tests could have
snuck past me easily though. (Flavio, thank you for filing
ZOOKEEPER-2463.) I'm curious to hear test results from others who are
trying RC1.
It looks like we also need an issue to track updating the copyright notice
in the docs. I don't believe this is an ASF compliance problem in the
same way that an erroneous NOTICE file would be, so I propose that we
address it in 3.5.3.
Flavio, you suggested filing a blocker for the ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc
failure. Did you want that targeted to 3.5.2 or 3.5.3?
Overall, how are people feeling about the RC1 [VOTE] at this point? Is
anyone considering a -1, or shall we proceed (keeping in mind it's an
alpha) with the intent of fixing things in a more rapid 3.5.3 release
cycle?
--Chris Nauroth
On 7/3/16, 8:43 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is
>still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from
>starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry and
>it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
>
>I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the
>Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
>
>I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have created
>ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
>
>-Flavio
>
>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three
>>failures with the new installation:
>>
>> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed 10911
>> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed
>>[Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
>> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression:
>>ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
>> Failures !!!
>> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>>
>>
>>
>> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
>> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
>> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
>> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
>> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void
>>ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) == 0'
>>failed.
>> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped)
>>ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar
>>${dir}$tst
>>
>> -Flavio
>>
>>
>>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Flavio,
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org
>>><ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> Hey Eddie,
>>>
>>> A few comments on your points:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth
>>>>updating to
>>>> the current year?
>>>
>>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can
>>>see.
>>>
>>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/
>>>folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013"
>>>copyright. Images attached.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>>>><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console
>>>><https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>>>
>>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even
>>>though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>>>
>>> Got it. :)
>>>
>>>
>>>> - Also this one:
>>>>
>>>>https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C
>>>>1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
>>>><https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3
>>>>C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create
>>>one and make it a blocker.
>>>
>>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>>>
>>>
>>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
>>>>related
>>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I
>>>didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or
>>>make sure that there are jiras for it.
>>>
>>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit
>>>tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java 1.7.
>>>So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it
>>>was not a false negative.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with
>>>the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might
>>>be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>>>
>>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted
>>>to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have
>>>researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>>>
>>> Edward
>>
>
>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
The issue with the TestReconfigServer test is that the client port is still used and we get a bind exception, which prevents the server from starting. To verify this locally, I simply added some code to retry and it works fine with that fix. Going forward we need a better fox.
I haven't able to figure out yet the issue with the Zookeeper_simpleSystem tests.
I have also found something strange with the multi tests. I have created ZK-2463 for this problem and made it a blocker for 3.5.3.
-Flavio
> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:25, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three failures with the new installation:
>
> Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed 10911
> tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
> tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression: ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
> Failures !!!
> Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
>
>
>
> TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
> ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
> Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
> Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
> zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) == 0' failed.
> /bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped) ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar ${dir}$tst
>
> -Flavio
>
>
>> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Flavio,
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>> Hey Eddie,
>>
>> A few comments on your points:
>>
>>>
>>> - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth updating to
>>> the current year?
>>
>> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can see.
>>
>> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/ folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013" copyright. Images attached.
>>
>>
>>
>>> - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>>
>> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>>
>> Got it. :)
>>
>>
>>> - Also this one:
>>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E <https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
>>>
>>
>> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create one and make it a blocker.
>>
>> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>>
>>
>>> - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them related
>>> to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or make sure that there are jiras for it.
>>
>> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java 1.7. So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it was not a false negative.
>>
>>
>>
>> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>>
>> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>>
>> Edward
>
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha candidate 1)
Posted by Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>.
I have spun a new ubuntu VM to check the C failures. I get three failures with the new installation:
Zookeeper_simpleSystem::testFirstServerDown : assertion : elapsed 10911
tests/TestClient.cc:411: Assertion: equality assertion failed [Expected: -101, Actual : -4]
tests/TestClient.cc:322: Assertion: assertion failed [Expression: ctx.waitForConnected(zk)]
Failures !!!
Run: 43 Failure total: 2 Failures: 2 Errors: 0
TestReconfigServer::testRemoveFollower/usr/bin/java
ZooKeeper JMX enabled by default
Using config: ./../../build/test/test-cppunit/conf/0.conf
Starting zookeeper ... FAILED TO START
zktest-mt: tests/ZooKeeperQuorumServer.cc:61: void ZooKeeperQuorumServer::start(): Assertion `system(command.c_str()) == 0' failed.
/bin/bash: line 5: 47059 Aborted (core dumped) ZKROOT=./../.. CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar ${dir}$tst
-Flavio
> On 03 Jul 2016, at 15:19, Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Flavio,
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> Hey Eddie,
>
> A few comments on your points:
>
> >
> > - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth updating to
> > the current year?
>
> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can see.
>
> Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/ folder. Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013" copyright. Images attached.
>
>
>
> > - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
> > https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console> <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>>
>
> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even though it isn't ideal. it is expected.
>
> Got it. :)
>
>
> > - Also this one:
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E <https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E>
> >
>
> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create one and make it a blocker.
>
> Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>
>
> > - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them related
> > to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
> >
> >
>
> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I didn't get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or make sure that there are jiras for it.
>
> Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit tests on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java 1.7. So, I am running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it was not a false negative.
>
>
>
> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with the RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might be ok given that this is still labeled alpha.
>
> Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted to the C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have researched further before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
>
> Edward
Re: RC1 issues (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.5.2-alpha
candidate 1)
Posted by Edward Ribeiro <ed...@gmail.com>.
Hi Flavio,
On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hey Eddie,
>
> A few comments on your points:
>
> >
> > - the copyright notice is still dating "2008-2013". It's worth updating
> to
> > the current year?
>
> Where are you seeing this? The NOTICE file is correct from what I can see.
>
Ops, sorry. I was referring to the PDFs and HTMLs in the docs/ folder.
Even after running "ant docs" the footnote has "2008-2013" copyright.
Images attached.
>
> > - I consistently ran on an test error equals to the one at
> > https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console <
> https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/2982/console>
>
> I think this is ZK-2152, which Chris has moved to 3.5.3, so even though it
> isn't ideal. it is expected.
>
Got it. :)
>
> > - Also this one:
> >
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/zookeeper-dev/201601.mbox/%3C1279938263.1283.1453526737790.JavaMail.jenkins@crius%3E
> >
>
> I don't know if there is a jira for this one. If not, better create one
> and make it a blocker.
>
Okay, gonna look for and do this.
>
> > - In fact, there were 14 failing tests total (I suspect all of them
> related
> > to the C tests). Any ideas? A couple of flacky tests?
> >
> >
>
> In general, having a release with so many tests failing is bad. I didn't
> get these test failures, so it would be great to report them or make sure
> that there are jiras for it.
>
Right. I was only skeptical of my own tests because I ran the unit tests
on a relatively old Ubuntu version, even though it was Java 1.7. So, I am
running the tests on a newer Linux soon just to make sure it was not a
false negative.
>
> Test failures are possibly an indication that something is bad with the
> RC, so I wouldn't have +1 it if I had observed all those. It might be ok
> given that this is still labeled alpha.
>
Excuse me. I only +1'ed because I suspect the errors are restricted to the
C binding and my Ubuntu version, etc. But I should have researched further
before giving +1, nevertheless. Point taken. :)
Edward