ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Stop nodes after test by default - IGNITE-6842
Date Tue, 20 Mar 2018 08:52:19 GMT
Dmitriy, thank you for review. This fix should do our tests more stable.

Nikolay, could you please merge?

вт, 20 мар. 2018 г. в 11:49, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com>:

> Looks good for me, please merge.
>
> 19 мар. 2018 г. 3:22 ПП пользователь "Dmitry Pavlov" <
> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com> написал:
>
> I agree it is important, I'm going to do a review, but do not have time
>> slot to do.
>>
>> Who could pick up this review?
>>
>> Dmitriy G., could I ask you?
>>
>> пн, 19 мар. 2018 г. в 15:13, Maxim Muzafarov <maxmuzaf@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Dmitry and other igniters,
>>>
>>> Will you have time to review this issue?
>>> I've preperated PR and TC for this, also I've fixed all comments made by
>>> Andrey Kuznetsov and Vyacheslav Daradur.
>>>
>>> I think this is important issue and will make test framework more stable
>>> and clear.
>>>
>>>
>>> TC: https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1138151
>>> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6842
>>> Upsource: https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-502
>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3542
>>>
>>> чт, 15 мар. 2018 г. в 13:31, Maxim Muzafarov <maxmuzaf@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Dmtry,
>>>>
>>>> Can we proceed with this change?
>>>> I've done with fixing review comments and tests that you mentioned
>>>> before.
>>>>
>>>> TC: https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1138151
>>>> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6842
>>>> Upsource: https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-502
>>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3542
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 20:42, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Ok, thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please let me know when we can proceed with review
>>>>> https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-502
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 20:17, Maxim Muzafarov <maxmuzaf@gmail.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Hello Dmitry,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Yes, I've updated test classes as you metioned before.
>>>>> > Now i'm fixing review comments. Within next few days I'll prepare
>>>>> final
>>>>> > version of this PR.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 20:12, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > Hi Maxim,
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > are there any news on these test fails?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Is issue ready for review?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > Sincerely,
>>>>> > > Dmitiry Pavlov
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > вт, 27 февр. 2018 г. в 17:12, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>>>> >:
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > > Hi, thank you!
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > I've found several suspicious fails: such test fails have
rate
>>>>> less
>>>>> > than
>>>>> > > > 1%, it is probably new failures.
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > It would be great if we can fix it before merge. Could
you
>>>>> address this
>>>>> > > > fails?
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Sincerely,
>>>>> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > IgniteCacheTestSuite5:
>>>>> IgniteCacheStoreCollectionTest.testStoreMap
>>>>> > (fail
>>>>> > > > rate 0,0%)
>>>>> > > > IgniteCacheTestSuite5:
>>>>> > > > CacheLateAffinityAssignmentTest.testDelayAssignmentClientJoin
>>>>> (fail
>>>>> > rate
>>>>> > > > 0,0%)
>>>>> > > > IgniteCacheWithIndexingTestSuite:
>>>>> > > > CacheRandomOperationsMultithreadedTest.testAtomicOffheapEviction
>>>>> (fail
>>>>> > > rate
>>>>> > > > 0,0%)
>>>>> > > > IgniteCacheWithIndexingTestSuite:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> CacheRandomOperationsMultithreadedTest.testAtomicOffheapEvictionIndexing
>>>>> > > > (fail rate 0,0%)
>>>>> > > > IgniteCacheWithIndexingTestSuite:
>>>>> > > > CacheRandomOperationsMultithreadedTest.testTxOffheapEviction
>>>>> (fail rate
>>>>> > > > 0,0%)
>>>>> > > > IgniteCacheWithIndexingTestSuite:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> CacheRandomOperationsMultithreadedTest.testTxOffheapEvictionIndexing
>>>>> > > (fail
>>>>> > > > rate 0,0%)
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > IgniteBinarySimpleNameMapperCacheFullApiTestSuite:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> GridCachePartitionedNearDisabledMultiNodeWithGroupFullApiSelfTest.testWithSkipStoreTx
>>>>> > > > (fail rate 0,0%)
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > вт, 27 февр. 2018 г. в 17:04, Maxim Muzafarov
<
>>>>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com>:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > >> Yep, link may not be correct.
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >> Here is correct version:
>>>>> > > >> TC: *
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=pull%2F3542%2Fhead
>>>>> > > >> <
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=IgniteTests24Java8&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=pull%2F3542%2Fhead
>>>>> > > >> >*
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >> вт, 27 февр. 2018 г. в 16:41, Dmitry Pavlov
<
>>>>> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>:
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >> > Hi Maxim,
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > could you please provide link to TC run on your
PR? It seems
>>>>> link
>>>>> > > >> provided
>>>>> > > >> > points to run of master. In changes field you
may select
>>>>> > > pull/3542/head
>>>>> > > >> > before starting RunAll.
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > Igniters,
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > this change is related to our test framework,
so change may
>>>>> affect
>>>>> > > your
>>>>> > > >> > tests. Please join to review
>>>>> > > >> > https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-502
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > Sincerely,
>>>>> > > >> > Dmitriy Pavlov
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > вт, 27 февр. 2018 г. в 16:14, Maxim Muzafarov
<
>>>>> maxmuzaf@gmail.com>:
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > Hi all,
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > I think, I've done with this issue, what
should we do next?
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > PR: https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3542
>>>>> > > >> > > Upsource:
>>>>> > > https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/ignite/review/IGNT-CR-502
>>>>> > > >> > > TC:
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=723895&personal=false&buildTypeId=&tab=vcsModificationTests
>>>>> > > >> > > JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6842
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > чт, 22 февр. 2018 г. в 14:12, Dmitry
Pavlov <
>>>>> > dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >:
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > Hi Maxim,
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > Thank you.
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > To my mind stopAllGrids call should
be kept in
>>>>> afterTestsStop().
>>>>> > > If
>>>>> > > >> > > > developer forgot to call super(), he
will see exception
>>>>> from
>>>>> > > >> > > > beforeTestsStart()
>>>>> > > >> > > > added by you.
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > If you think patch is ready to be reviewed,
please change
>>>>> JIRA
>>>>> > > >> status
>>>>> > > >> > to
>>>>> > > >> > > > "Patch Available".
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > Optionally you can create Upsource
review. It would be
>>>>> easier
>>>>> > for
>>>>> > > >> > > multiple
>>>>> > > >> > > > reviewers to handle this patch. This
test framework is
>>>>> used by
>>>>> > all
>>>>> > > >> > > Igniters
>>>>> > > >> > > > so Upsource would be good option (
>>>>> > > >> https://reviews.ignite.apache.org/
>>>>> > > >> > ).
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > Sincerely,
>>>>> > > >> > > > Dmitriy Pavlov
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > чт, 22 февр. 2018 г. в 13:44,
Maxim Muzafarov <
>>>>> > maxmuzaf@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >:
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > Hi all,
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > I've made some changes based on
our previous
>>>>> discusstions,
>>>>> > > please
>>>>> > > >> see
>>>>> > > >> > > PR
>>>>> > > >> > > > > [1]:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > 1) Remove duplicated code for
stopGrid (by index and by
>>>>> name);
>>>>> > > >> > > > > 2) Add new method that thows exception
if not all grids
>>>>> > haven't
>>>>> > > >> > stopped
>>>>> > > >> > > > > correctly;
>>>>> > > >> > > > > 3)  Change tests that have been
affected by this
>>>>> changes;
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > Also, I have some thoughts for
clarification:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > 1) beforeTestsStart() - I expect
here in subtests that
>>>>> grids
>>>>> > are
>>>>> > > >> not
>>>>> > > >> > > > > started yet. Am I right?
>>>>> > > >> > > > > 2) I think we should call stopAllGrids
in tearDown
>>>>> method. So,
>>>>> > > if
>>>>> > > >> in
>>>>> > > >> > > some
>>>>> > > >> > > > > cases we'll override afterTestsStop
in subclasses and
>>>>> forgot
>>>>> > to
>>>>> > > >> call
>>>>> > > >> > > > > super() it won't lead us to exception.
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/3542
>>>>> > > >> > > > > [2]
>>>>> > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewModification.html?modId=717275
>>>>> > > >> > > > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6842
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > ср, 7 февр. 2018 г. в
18:28, Maxim Muzafarov <
>>>>> > > maxmuzaf@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >> >:
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > > Thank you all,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > > I'll add this comment's for
JIRA ticket, if you don't
>>>>> mind.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > > ср, 7 февр. 2018 г.
в 15:16, Dmitry Pavlov <
>>>>> > > >> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >> > >:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> Yes, this solution allows
to cover both cases:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> a) not stopped node from
previous test and
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> b) allows to remove useless
code that stops Ignite
>>>>> nodes
>>>>> > from
>>>>> > > >> each
>>>>> > > >> > > > test.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> ср, 7 февр. 2018
г. в 15:13, Anton Vinogradov <
>>>>> > > >> > > > avinogradov@gridgain.com
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > Maxim,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > We discussed with
Dima privately, and decided
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > 1) We have to assert
that there is no alive nodes
>>>>> at
>>>>> > > >> > > > > GridAbstractTest's
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > beforeTestsStarted
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > 2) We have to kill
all alive nodes (without force)
>>>>> at
>>>>> > > >> > > > > GridAbstractTest's
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > afterTestsStopped
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > 3) In case of any
exceptions at #2 we have to see
>>>>> test
>>>>> > > error
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > 4) We can get rid
of all useless stopAllGrids at
>>>>> > > >> > > GridAbstractTest's
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > subclasses.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > On Wed, Feb 7, 2018
at 2:32 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <
>>>>> > > >> > > > dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > wrote:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > Let's
just add stopAllGrids(flase) to
>>>>> > GridAbstractTest
>>>>> > > 's
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > afterTestsStopped
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > method body.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > Can't agree
with it becase implicit silent
>>>>> shutdown of
>>>>> > > >> nodes
>>>>> > > >> > > from
>>>>> > > >> > > > > test
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > framework may
cause a lot of bugs introduced to
>>>>> Ignite.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > I think stop+test
fail should occur.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > In that case
author of incorrect test or not
>>>>> consistent
>>>>> > > >> Ignite
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> shutdown
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > will see problem.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > 'Fail fast'
if always better than hidding real
>>>>> problem
>>>>> > > >> under
>>>>> > > >> > > > > automatic
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > framework feature.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > ср, 7 февр.
2018 г. в 14:05, Anton Vinogradov <
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> avinogradov@gridgain.com
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi all,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I've
made some research about this problem
>>>>> and i
>>>>> > > think
>>>>> > > >> > that
>>>>> > > >> > > in
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > general
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > we
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > should
move stopAllGrids method in
>>>>> GridAbstractTest
>>>>> > > >> class
>>>>> > > >> > to
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > afterTestsStopped
method with some changes.
>>>>> Am I
>>>>> > > right?
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > Let's
just add stopAllGrids(flase) to
>>>>> > GridAbstractTest
>>>>> > > 's
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > afterTestsStopped
method
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > body.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I
have a question about stopAllGrids(boolean
>>>>> > cancel)
>>>>> > > >> this
>>>>> > > >> > > > > "cancel"
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > That's
just a flag means "do not wait for any
>>>>> > > operations
>>>>> > > >> > > finish"
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > See no
reason to set it true in that case.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > If
you delegate closing to afterTestsStopped
>>>>> this
>>>>> > > will
>>>>> > > >> > > affect
>>>>> > > >> > > > > only
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > last
test (method).
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > The idea
is to stop all nodes at last test's
>>>>> method
>>>>> > > >> finish.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > 
Nodes that survive between tests can affect
>>>>> > > successive
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > tests.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > Thats
ok. we have a lot tests where nodes
>>>>> reusable
>>>>> > > >> between
>>>>> > > >> > > > test's
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > methods.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Wed,
Feb 7, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Dmitry Pavlov <
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi
Igniters,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > IMO
nodes that survive between tests is not
>>>>> general
>>>>> > > >> > practice
>>>>> > > >> > > > and
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> I'm
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > not
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > sure
is a best practice. I suggest to mark
>>>>> such
>>>>> > tests
>>>>> > > >> with
>>>>> > > >> > > > some
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > method
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > overriden
from AbstractTest.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > About
cancel flag, please note
>>>>> stopAllGrids(boolean
>>>>> > > >> > cancel)
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > cancel=false
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > allows
to wait of checkpoint ends in case
>>>>> > persistence
>>>>> > > >> > > enabled.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > I
still suggest to avoid stopping any nodes
>>>>> by
>>>>> > test,
>>>>> > > >> but
>>>>> > > >> > > > > validate
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> not
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > stopped
node exist and fail test instead of
>>>>> siltent
>>>>> > > >> > implicit
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> actions.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Sincerely,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Dmitriy
Pavlov
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > ср,
7 февр. 2018 г. в 13:04, Andrey
>>>>> Kuznetsov <
>>>>> > > >> > > > > stkuzma@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
Hi Maxim,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
Regarding your first question, the use of
>>>>> > > >> > > afterTestsStopped
>>>>> > > >> > > > is
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> not
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > enough
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
to stop all nodes, since each individual
>>>>> test
>>>>> > > >> (method)
>>>>> > > >> > can
>>>>> > > >> > > > > start
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > custom
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > set
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
of notes during its operation, and this
>>>>> very test
>>>>> > > >> should
>>>>> > > >> > > > stop
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> all
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > those
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
nodes. If you delegate closing to
>>>>> > afterTestsStopped
>>>>> > > >> this
>>>>> > > >> > > > will
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > affect
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > only
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
last test (method). Nodes that survive
>>>>> between
>>>>> > > tests
>>>>> > > >> can
>>>>> > > >> > > > > affect
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > successive
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
tests.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
2018-02-07 1:10 GMT+03:00 Maxim Muzafarov <
>>>>> > > >> > > > maxmuzaf@gmail.com
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> Hello,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> I've made some research about this
>>>>> problem and
>>>>> > i
>>>>> > > >> think
>>>>> > > >> > > > that
>>>>> > > >> > > > > in
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > general
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > we
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> should move stopAllGrids method in
>>>>> > > GridAbstractTest
>>>>> > > >> > > class
>>>>> > > >> > > > to
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> afterTestsStopped method with some
>>>>> changes. Am
>>>>> > I
>>>>> > > >> > right?
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> Also, I have a question about
>>>>> > > stopAllGrids(boolean
>>>>> > > >> > > cancel)
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> this
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > "cancel"
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> argument. Why in some cases we should
>>>>> interrupt
>>>>> > > >> > > ComputeJob
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> and in
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > some
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> cases shouldn't? For example here:
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>
>>>>> > > >> IgniteBaselineAffinityTopologyActivationTest#afterTest
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> we call method stopAllGrids(false) this
>>>>> way.
>>>>> > Why
>>>>> > > >> not
>>>>> > > >> > > > "true"
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > argument
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> instead?
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
> --
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
Best regards,
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
  Andrey Kuznetsov.
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >> >
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >>
>>>>> > > >> > > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > > >
>>>>> > > >> > > >
>>>>> > > >> > >
>>>>> > > >> >
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message