You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@qpid.apache.org by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> on 2007/10/01 20:40:37 UTC
House keeping...
Where are we in relation to cutting a new M2 release?
Carl.
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
ack,
If we are still clean - let's cut RC's Friday and restart the vote
Monday if all goes well
Carl.
Robert Godfrey wrote:
> I don't think there's a high chance... I'll be running the unit tests
> in a loop from now on... We'll set up some other tests as well... I
> think cutting the RC's now is ok, but we won't be in a position to
> vote until we're satisfied there's no more failures... probably the
> start of next week...
>
> -- Rob
>
> On 03/10/2007, *Carl Trieloff* <cctrieloff@redhat.com
> <ma...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
> given that, should we go ahead and create the RC's + check them.
> That will take a few days so we are ready to vote
> if all goes well.
>
> Unless you think there is a high chance of issues coming out of
> the build.
>
> Carl.
>
>
>
> Robert Godfrey wrote:
>> We think we are good now, but we are now wanting to run tests
>> solidly for a few days to make sure there are no more issues.
>>
>> If we can go through that without any failures then we'll be able
>> to vote for a release.
>>
>> Rob
>>
>> On 03/10/2007, *Carl Trieloff* <cctrieloff@redhat.com
>> <ma...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Are we then ready to create a new set of M2 RC?
>>
>> Carl.
>>
>>
>> Rupert Smith wrote:
>> > I may have thought that to begin with, but then realized I
>> had searched for
>> > usages of Iterator.remove(), and not specifically
>> > IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove().
>> >
>> > On 02/10/2007, Robert Greig <robert.j.greig@gmail.com
>> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith < rupertlssmith@googlemail.com
>> <ma...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> BTW The Qpid code does not call
>> IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(), which
>> >>>
>> >> is
>> >>
>> >>> the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so,
>> a HashMap
>> >>>
>> >> might be
>> >>
>> >>> safer.
>> >>>
>> >> Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing
>> items in an
>> >> iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
>> >>
>> >> RG
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Robert Godfrey <ro...@gmail.com>.
I don't think there's a high chance... I'll be running the unit tests in a
loop from now on... We'll set up some other tests as well... I think cutting
the RC's now is ok, but we won't be in a position to vote until we're
satisfied there's no more failures... probably the start of next week...
-- Rob
On 03/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> given that, should we go ahead and create the RC's + check them. That will
> take a few days so we are ready to vote
> if all goes well.
>
> Unless you think there is a high chance of issues coming out of the build.
>
> Carl.
>
>
> Robert Godfrey wrote:
>
> We think we are good now, but we are now wanting to run tests solidly for
> a few days to make sure there are no more issues.
>
> If we can go through that without any failures then we'll be able to vote
> for a release.
>
> Rob
>
> On 03/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Are we then ready to create a new set of M2 RC?
> >
> > Carl.
> >
> >
> > Rupert Smith wrote:
> > > I may have thought that to begin with, but then realized I had
> > searched for
> > > usages of Iterator.remove(), and not specifically
> > > IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove().
> > >
> > > On 02/10/2007, Robert Greig <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith < rupertlssmith@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> BTW The Qpid code does not call IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(),
> > which
> > >>>
> > >> is
> > >>
> > >>> the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a HashMap
> > >>>
> > >> might be
> > >>
> > >>> safer.
> > >>>
> > >> Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing items in an
> > >> iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
> > >>
> > >> RG
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
given that, should we go ahead and create the RC's + check them. That
will take a few days so we are ready to vote
if all goes well.
Unless you think there is a high chance of issues coming out of the build.
Carl.
Robert Godfrey wrote:
> We think we are good now, but we are now wanting to run tests solidly
> for a few days to make sure there are no more issues.
>
> If we can go through that without any failures then we'll be able to
> vote for a release.
>
> Rob
>
> On 03/10/2007, *Carl Trieloff* <cctrieloff@redhat.com
> <ma...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>
> Are we then ready to create a new set of M2 RC?
>
> Carl.
>
>
> Rupert Smith wrote:
> > I may have thought that to begin with, but then realized I had
> searched for
> > usages of Iterator.remove(), and not specifically
> > IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove().
> >
> > On 02/10/2007, Robert Greig <robert.j.greig@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith < rupertlssmith@googlemail.com
> <ma...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> BTW The Qpid code does not call
> IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(), which
> >>>
> >> is
> >>
> >>> the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a
> HashMap
> >>>
> >> might be
> >>
> >>> safer.
> >>>
> >> Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing items in an
> >> iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
> >>
> >> RG
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Robert Godfrey <ro...@gmail.com>.
We think we are good now, but we are now wanting to run tests solidly for a
few days to make sure there are no more issues.
If we can go through that without any failures then we'll be able to vote
for a release.
Rob
On 03/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> Are we then ready to create a new set of M2 RC?
>
> Carl.
>
>
> Rupert Smith wrote:
> > I may have thought that to begin with, but then realized I had searched
> for
> > usages of Iterator.remove(), and not specifically
> > IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove().
> >
> > On 02/10/2007, Robert Greig <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> BTW The Qpid code does not call IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(),
> which
> >>>
> >> is
> >>
> >>> the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a HashMap
> >>>
> >> might be
> >>
> >>> safer.
> >>>
> >> Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing items in an
> >> iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
> >>
> >> RG
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
Are we then ready to create a new set of M2 RC?
Carl.
Rupert Smith wrote:
> I may have thought that to begin with, but then realized I had searched for
> usages of Iterator.remove(), and not specifically
> IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove().
>
> On 02/10/2007, Robert Greig <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> BTW The Qpid code does not call IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(), which
>>>
>> is
>>
>>> the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a HashMap
>>>
>> might be
>>
>>> safer.
>>>
>> Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing items in an
>> iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
>>
>> RG
>>
>>
>
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com>.
I may have thought that to begin with, but then realized I had searched for
usages of Iterator.remove(), and not specifically
IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove().
On 02/10/2007, Robert Greig <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > BTW The Qpid code does not call IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(), which
> is
> > the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a HashMap
> might be
> > safer.
>
> Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing items in an
> iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
>
> RG
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Robert Greig <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 02/10/2007, Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> BTW The Qpid code does not call IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(), which is
> the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a HashMap might be
> safer.
Ah, I thought someone had told me that it was removing items in an
iterator. Must have picked up the wrong end of the stick.
RG
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Rupert Smith <ru...@googlemail.com>.
BTW The Qpid code does not call IdentityHashMap.Iterator.remove(), which is
the source of the problem. So it is probably ok, even so, a HashMap might be
safer.
On 02/10/2007, Robert Godfrey <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From our side what we want to do with the Java is have all the remaining
> M2
> JIRAs closed (which we believe will be done by the end of today) and then
> just have the tests run in a continuous loop for a couple of days to
> satisfy
> ourselves that there are no remaining race conditions.
>
> -- Rob
>
> On 01/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the update.
> > Carl.
> >
> > Robert Greig wrote:
> > > On 01/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Where are we in relation to cutting a new M2 release?
> > >>
> > >
> > > We are, we believe, very close.
> > >
> > > You will not believe this but we have found a bug in
> > > java.util.IdentityHashMap which was the cause of one of the hangs that
> > > we see periodically. Unfortunately the IdentityHashMap is used in a
> > > MINA class.
> > >
> > > We have a reproducible isolated test case and I am going to raise it
> > > with Sun but obviously in this case we are going to look for a
> > > workaround. There is no semantic need to use an IdentityHashMap and
> > > regular HashMap does not exhibit this bug so we should be able to
> > > apply a workaround in our code. We also found usage of IdentityHashMap
> > > in a similar situation in the Qpid code which we are going to
> > > remediate too.
> > >
> > > I'll send another update tomorrow morning UK time, also detailing any
> > > other jiras that are remaining (I know a good number got updated
> > > today).
> > >
> > > RG
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Robert Godfrey <ro...@gmail.com>.
>From our side what we want to do with the Java is have all the remaining M2
JIRAs closed (which we believe will be done by the end of today) and then
just have the tests run in a continuous loop for a couple of days to satisfy
ourselves that there are no remaining race conditions.
-- Rob
On 01/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the update.
> Carl.
>
> Robert Greig wrote:
> > On 01/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Where are we in relation to cutting a new M2 release?
> >>
> >
> > We are, we believe, very close.
> >
> > You will not believe this but we have found a bug in
> > java.util.IdentityHashMap which was the cause of one of the hangs that
> > we see periodically. Unfortunately the IdentityHashMap is used in a
> > MINA class.
> >
> > We have a reproducible isolated test case and I am going to raise it
> > with Sun but obviously in this case we are going to look for a
> > workaround. There is no semantic need to use an IdentityHashMap and
> > regular HashMap does not exhibit this bug so we should be able to
> > apply a workaround in our code. We also found usage of IdentityHashMap
> > in a similar situation in the Qpid code which we are going to
> > remediate too.
> >
> > I'll send another update tomorrow morning UK time, also detailing any
> > other jiras that are remaining (I know a good number got updated
> > today).
> >
> > RG
> >
>
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com>.
Thanks for the update.
Carl.
Robert Greig wrote:
> On 01/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Where are we in relation to cutting a new M2 release?
>>
>
> We are, we believe, very close.
>
> You will not believe this but we have found a bug in
> java.util.IdentityHashMap which was the cause of one of the hangs that
> we see periodically. Unfortunately the IdentityHashMap is used in a
> MINA class.
>
> We have a reproducible isolated test case and I am going to raise it
> with Sun but obviously in this case we are going to look for a
> workaround. There is no semantic need to use an IdentityHashMap and
> regular HashMap does not exhibit this bug so we should be able to
> apply a workaround in our code. We also found usage of IdentityHashMap
> in a similar situation in the Qpid code which we are going to
> remediate too.
>
> I'll send another update tomorrow morning UK time, also detailing any
> other jiras that are remaining (I know a good number got updated
> today).
>
> RG
>
Re: House keeping...
Posted by Robert Greig <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 01/10/2007, Carl Trieloff <cc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Where are we in relation to cutting a new M2 release?
We are, we believe, very close.
You will not believe this but we have found a bug in
java.util.IdentityHashMap which was the cause of one of the hangs that
we see periodically. Unfortunately the IdentityHashMap is used in a
MINA class.
We have a reproducible isolated test case and I am going to raise it
with Sun but obviously in this case we are going to look for a
workaround. There is no semantic need to use an IdentityHashMap and
regular HashMap does not exhibit this bug so we should be able to
apply a workaround in our code. We also found usage of IdentityHashMap
in a similar situation in the Qpid code which we are going to
remediate too.
I'll send another update tomorrow morning UK time, also detailing any
other jiras that are remaining (I know a good number got updated
today).
RG