trafodion-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Varnau <steve.var...@esgyn.com>
Subject RE: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
Date Mon, 18 Jul 2016 19:27:02 GMT
The current test process looks at which files have been modified and puts it
into a bucket, which is used to determine what tests to run.
However, the only buckets that now exist are DOC and NONDOC.

So if the change consists only of things in the docs/ tree, then it only
does static check and a docs build.  If there are non-docs changes, it
assumes it needs to run all the build and tests.

It is pretty conservative, but the more heuristics we put in to customize
the tests, the more chance that it will miss something.  I can imagine a
connectivity only change not running the jobs that don't exercise
connectivity. But figuring out what things might affect hive tests seems
much harder.

There are many things (installer, executor,...) that might affect any of our
tests.  Seems safer to keep the test heuristics very simple and predictable,
and change the content of the test suites to what ought to be in check
versus nightly.

--Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Qifan Chen [mailto:qifan.chen@esgyn.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:43 AM
> To: dev <dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
>
> The author just honestly describes the changes, and the tool picks the
> right tests.  Thanks --Qifan
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Sean Broeder
> <sean.broeder@esgyn.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'd prefer not to leave it up to authors to select which tests are
> > appropriate.  Sometimes we get it right and others we are horribly
> > wrong.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sean
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Qifan Chen [mailto:qifan.chen@esgyn.com]
> > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:20 AM
> > To: dev <dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
> >
> > I agree with Sandhya and wonder if we can enhance check-PR tests (hive
> for
> > example, in question) with the following twist.
> >
> >    1. Randomly select several (say 3) tests from regression/hive. The
> >    rational is that we only need to  sanity check the changes and a full
> > daily
> >    build with test will follow the merge.
> >    2. Before the check-in, we always run the full regression test, and I
> > do
> >    not see the value to run full Hive again in check-PR.
> >    3. In the future, we could find the most appreciate tests for
> > check-PR
> >    (instead of randomly select, or select the full set).  The author can
> > point
> >    out the nature of the change and the check-in tool does the
> > selection.
> > For
> >    example, a change in DoP for Hbase tables will select some tests from
> >    regress/seabase, but not from regress/hive.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > --Qifan
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Sandhya Sundaresan <
> > sandhya.sundaresan@esgyn.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +0 for me.
> > >  I am not sure of the need to add the whole test suite  to check
> > > tests.
> > > The hive regressions do run nightly anyway so failures should be clear
> > > on each nightly run on a daily basis.
> > > My concern is that long running tests like hive/TEST018   are more to
> > test
> > > features like bulkload/unload and since we already have the option to
> > > run "extra tests" in Jenkins, I'm not sure bringing in entire test
> > > suites  into check tests is the right approach or trend going forward
> > > and  adding time and resources to what is supposed to be a sanity test
> > for
> > > every single  PR.
> > >
> > > Sandhya
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Selva Govindarajan [mailto:selva.govindarajan@esgyn.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 7:22 AM
> > > To: dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
> > >
> > > Hive regressions takes little less than an hour. As I said before, the
> > > time is not a factor because the regressions are run in parallel in
> > > different VMs. Seabase regressions which is run as part of check-PR
> > > takes around 1 hour and 40 mins. Hence hive regressions shouldn't add
> > > more time for check-PR to complete, but of course it would need
> > > another
> > > VM.
> > >
> > > Selva
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jin, Jian (Seth) [mailto:Jian.jin@esgyn.cn]
> > > Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2016 7:31 PM
> > > To: dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
> > >
> > > How long will it take for Hive regression?
> > >
> > > Br,
> > >
> > > Seth
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Liu, Ming (Ming) [mailto:ming.liu@esgyn.cn]
> > > Sent: 2016年7月16日 9:16
> > > To: dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
> > >
> > > +1 to this
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Selva Govindarajan [mailto:selva.govindarajan@esgyn.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 9:08 AM
> > > To: dev@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
> > >
> > > If you have subscribed to Trafodion Daily Build, you would have
> > > noticed that the daily build has been failing for some days. Most
> > > often, it is due the failure in hive regression tests run as part of
> > > the daily build.
> > > Lately, there has been some conscious effort made successfully to
> > > ensure that the hive regression tests can be run reliably. To maintain
> > > the Trafodion daily build in that state, I am proposing to include
> > > hive regressions to check-PR tests.  It shouldn’t add the overall time
> > > taken to regressions tests because tests are run in parallel on
> > > different VMs, though it would consume more resources.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -          Selva
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards, --Qifan
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards, --Qifan

Mime
View raw message