trafodion-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Qifan Chen <qifan.c...@esgyn.com>
Subject Re: Proposal to add hive regression tests to check-PR tests
Date Mon, 18 Jul 2016 16:19:45 GMT
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

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