New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rust Iron framework #1101

Closed
wants to merge 14 commits into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@torhve
Contributor

torhve commented Oct 17, 2014

No description provided.

RETCODE=$(fw_exists rust.installed)
[ ! "$RETCODE" == 0 ] || { return 0; }
curl -s https://static.rust-lang.org/rustup.sh | sudo sh

This comment has been minimized.

@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 17, 2014

Member

Is there any chance this could be changed to a permalink with a version?

@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 17, 2014

Member

Is there any chance this could be changed to a permalink with a version?

[ ! "$RETCODE" == 0 ] || { return 0; }
curl -s https://static.rust-lang.org/rustup.sh | sudo sh

This comment has been minimized.

@hamiltont

hamiltont Oct 17, 2014

Contributor

Could you add the equivalent of rust --version here, so log output will have the version

@hamiltont

hamiltont Oct 17, 2014

Contributor

Could you add the equivalent of rust --version here, so log output will have the version

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 22, 2014

Member

@torhve Looks like it's still failing to complile: https://travis-ci.org/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/jobs/38420515

CalledProcessError: Command 'cargo build --release' returned non-zero exit status 101
Member

msmith-techempower commented Oct 22, 2014

@torhve Looks like it's still failing to complile: https://travis-ci.org/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/jobs/38420515

CalledProcessError: Command 'cargo build --release' returned non-zero exit status 101
@torhve

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@torhve

torhve Oct 26, 2014

Contributor

Looks like it tests OK now, but the build still fails.
It looks like it might be the verify is failing or setup script? Output from the actualy web testing looks OK.

Contributor

torhve commented Oct 26, 2014

Looks like it tests OK now, but the build still fails.
It looks like it might be the verify is failing or setup script? Output from the actualy web testing looks OK.

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 27, 2014

Member

@torhve I think this is our toolset having some growing pains - we will try and get this fixed up soon.

Member

msmith-techempower commented Oct 27, 2014

@torhve I think this is our toolset having some growing pains - we will try and get this fixed up soon.

@hamiltont

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hamiltont

hamiltont Oct 27, 2014

Contributor

The Rust work all LGTM. My vote is to merge this PR, but create an issue
indicating that something is failing with our test framework here. It
shouldn't say everything passes and then return 1, that's a bug somewhere

Contributor

hamiltont commented Oct 27, 2014

The Rust work all LGTM. My vote is to merge this PR, but create an issue
indicating that something is failing with our test framework here. It
shouldn't say everything passes and then return 1, that's a bug somewhere

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 28, 2014

Member

@hamiltont Are you saying that you tested this with your travis instance and it worked?

Member

msmith-techempower commented Oct 28, 2014

@hamiltont Are you saying that you tested this with your travis instance and it worked?

@hamiltont

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hamiltont

hamiltont Oct 28, 2014

Contributor

I am saying that the detailed output logs for the last travis build on this
pull request indicate that rust passed all verification tests successfully.
The travis build should have been green, but it looks like there is a bug
causing run tests to return exit code 1 when it should have returning exit
code 0
On Oct 28, 2014 2:37 PM, "Mike Smith" notifications@github.com wrote:

@hamiltont https://github.com/hamiltont Are you saying that you tested
this with your travis instance and it worked?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1101 (comment)
.

Contributor

hamiltont commented Oct 28, 2014

I am saying that the detailed output logs for the last travis build on this
pull request indicate that rust passed all verification tests successfully.
The travis build should have been green, but it looks like there is a bug
causing run tests to return exit code 1 when it should have returning exit
code 0
On Oct 28, 2014 2:37 PM, "Mike Smith" notifications@github.com wrote:

@hamiltont https://github.com/hamiltont Are you saying that you tested
this with your travis instance and it worked?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1101 (comment)
.

@hamiltont

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hamiltont

hamiltont Oct 28, 2014

Contributor

Although I did not look for an error message about the port not being
released by stop . Perhaps that is what is happening here , someone needs
to read the detailed log carefully
On Oct 28, 2014 2:49 PM, "Hamilton Turner" hamiltont@gmail.com wrote:

I am saying that the detailed output logs for the last travis build on
this pull request indicate that rust passed all verification tests
successfully. The travis build should have been green, but it looks like
there is a bug causing run tests to return exit code 1 when it should have
returning exit code 0
On Oct 28, 2014 2:37 PM, "Mike Smith" notifications@github.com wrote:

@hamiltont https://github.com/hamiltont Are you saying that you tested
this with your travis instance and it worked?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1101 (comment)
.

Contributor

hamiltont commented Oct 28, 2014

Although I did not look for an error message about the port not being
released by stop . Perhaps that is what is happening here , someone needs
to read the detailed log carefully
On Oct 28, 2014 2:49 PM, "Hamilton Turner" hamiltont@gmail.com wrote:

I am saying that the detailed output logs for the last travis build on
this pull request indicate that rust passed all verification tests
successfully. The travis build should have been green, but it looks like
there is a bug causing run tests to return exit code 1 when it should have
returning exit code 0
On Oct 28, 2014 2:37 PM, "Mike Smith" notifications@github.com wrote:

@hamiltont https://github.com/hamiltont Are you saying that you tested
this with your travis instance and it worked?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1101 (comment)
.

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 28, 2014

Member

I see the exact error message and understand it. Basically, this was pulled before your reworked of our __forciblyEndPortBoundProcesses to have tuple out/err from the communicates. Essentially, we were trying to write to an instance of err that didn't exist because it overwrote the original.

Rant: this is why I hate python sometimes - why can I redeclare variables? Oh, because declaration and assignment are the same. /rant

I agree that this looks like Rust isn't probably stoping; we would have more useful information after a rebase and a rerun after we merge #1145

Member

msmith-techempower commented Oct 28, 2014

I see the exact error message and understand it. Basically, this was pulled before your reworked of our __forciblyEndPortBoundProcesses to have tuple out/err from the communicates. Essentially, we were trying to write to an instance of err that didn't exist because it overwrote the original.

Rant: this is why I hate python sometimes - why can I redeclare variables? Oh, because declaration and assignment are the same. /rant

I agree that this looks like Rust isn't probably stoping; we would have more useful information after a rebase and a rerun after we merge #1145

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Oct 31, 2014

Member

@torhve I pulled your latest and there is still an error:

INFO:root:Start exception:
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "/home/techempower/FrameworkBenchmarks/toolset/benchmark/framework_test.py", line 153, in start
        retcode = self.setup_module.start(self, out, err)
      File "/home/techempower/FrameworkBenchmarks/frameworks/Rust/Iron/setup.py", line 8, in start
        subprocess.check_call("cargo build --release", shell=True, cwd="Iron", stderr=errfile, stdout=logfile)
      File "/usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py", line 540, in check_call
        raise CalledProcessError(retcode, cmd)
    CalledProcessError: Command 'cargo build --release' returned non-zero exit status 101

Member

msmith-techempower commented Oct 31, 2014

@torhve I pulled your latest and there is still an error:

INFO:root:Start exception:
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "/home/techempower/FrameworkBenchmarks/toolset/benchmark/framework_test.py", line 153, in start
        retcode = self.setup_module.start(self, out, err)
      File "/home/techempower/FrameworkBenchmarks/frameworks/Rust/Iron/setup.py", line 8, in start
        subprocess.check_call("cargo build --release", shell=True, cwd="Iron", stderr=errfile, stdout=logfile)
      File "/usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py", line 540, in check_call
        raise CalledProcessError(retcode, cmd)
    CalledProcessError: Command 'cargo build --release' returned non-zero exit status 101

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Nov 5, 2014

Member

Ugh, the bleeding edge has cut you again:

techempower@tfbapp3:~/FrameworkBenchmarks/frameworks/Rust/Iron$ cargo build --release
   Compiling mysql v0.0.0 (https://github.com/blackbeam/rust-mysql-simple#7934b0ee)
   Compiling http v0.1.0-pre (https://github.com/chris-morgan/rust-http.git#c8aef7e0)
src/value.rs:6:16: 6:27 error: unresolved import `std::i64::parse_bytes`. There is no `parse_bytes` in `std::i64`
src/value.rs:6 use std::i64::{parse_bytes};
                              ^~~~~~~~~~~
error: aborting due to previous error
Build failed, waiting for other jobs to finish...
Could not compile `mysql`.

To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.

Additionally, you will need to rebase master into your branch to get it to work.

Member

msmith-techempower commented Nov 5, 2014

Ugh, the bleeding edge has cut you again:

techempower@tfbapp3:~/FrameworkBenchmarks/frameworks/Rust/Iron$ cargo build --release
   Compiling mysql v0.0.0 (https://github.com/blackbeam/rust-mysql-simple#7934b0ee)
   Compiling http v0.1.0-pre (https://github.com/chris-morgan/rust-http.git#c8aef7e0)
src/value.rs:6:16: 6:27 error: unresolved import `std::i64::parse_bytes`. There is no `parse_bytes` in `std::i64`
src/value.rs:6 use std::i64::{parse_bytes};
                              ^~~~~~~~~~~
error: aborting due to previous error
Build failed, waiting for other jobs to finish...
Could not compile `mysql`.

To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.

Additionally, you will need to rebase master into your branch to get it to work.

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Nov 10, 2014

Member

I suggest that you clamp down the version being used. Maybe just use v0.12.0 for the time being?

https://static.rust-lang.org/dist/rust-0.12.0-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.tar.gz

Member

msmith-techempower commented Nov 10, 2014

I suggest that you clamp down the version being used. Maybe just use v0.12.0 for the time being?

https://static.rust-lang.org/dist/rust-0.12.0-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu.tar.gz

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Nov 11, 2014

Member

There are still some warnings, and the process does not exit successfully, but we are able to start/run/stop... so I'm considering merging this.

My biggest concern is that if I merge this, the nightly build will break it two days from now.

Member

msmith-techempower commented Nov 11, 2014

There are still some warnings, and the process does not exit successfully, but we are able to start/run/stop... so I'm considering merging this.

My biggest concern is that if I merge this, the nightly build will break it two days from now.

@Vikaton

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Vikaton

Vikaton Feb 8, 2015

any updates on merging this?

Vikaton commented Feb 8, 2015

any updates on merging this?

@hamiltont

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hamiltont

hamiltont Feb 8, 2015

Contributor

@Ap0ph1s I think the main concern is this line curl -s https://static.rust-lang.org/rustup.sh | sudo sh, becuase it was regularly returning a different version of rust and breaking this PR. I think @torhve updated this multiple times because Rust was moving so quickly.

There's not much value in merging something that's only stable for a week, so IIRC the consensus is that this needs to be linked to one version, but it's unclear which version. If you're interested in seeing Rust results ASAP, feel free to pull this branch into your own repo, fix it to a single worthy version, and send in an updated PR

Contributor

hamiltont commented Feb 8, 2015

@Ap0ph1s I think the main concern is this line curl -s https://static.rust-lang.org/rustup.sh | sudo sh, becuase it was regularly returning a different version of rust and breaking this PR. I think @torhve updated this multiple times because Rust was moving so quickly.

There's not much value in merging something that's only stable for a week, so IIRC the consensus is that this needs to be linked to one version, but it's unclear which version. If you're interested in seeing Rust results ASAP, feel free to pull this branch into your own repo, fix it to a single worthy version, and send in an updated PR

@hamiltont

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hamiltont

hamiltont Feb 8, 2015

Contributor

I see this timeline, perhaps this could be fixed to the beta when it's out?

Rust 1.0.0-alpha – Friday, Jan 9, 2015
Rust 1.0.0-beta1 – Week of Feb 16, 2015
Rust 1.0.0 – One or more six-week cycles later
Contributor

hamiltont commented Feb 8, 2015

I see this timeline, perhaps this could be fixed to the beta when it's out?

Rust 1.0.0-alpha – Friday, Jan 9, 2015
Rust 1.0.0-beta1 – Week of Feb 16, 2015
Rust 1.0.0 – One or more six-week cycles later
@hamiltont

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@hamiltont

hamiltont Feb 8, 2015

Contributor

Oh, I also see that the alpha candidate is supposedly feature complete, so it is not too unreasonable to fix this to the alpha if the beta is taking too long as the upgrade should be painless

Contributor

hamiltont commented Feb 8, 2015

Oh, I also see that the alpha candidate is supposedly feature complete, so it is not too unreasonable to fix this to the alpha if the beta is taking too long as the upgrade should be painless

@Vikaton

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Vikaton

Vikaton Feb 8, 2015

Rust is improving every day, whether performance or features, or even both, so I think It can wait until beta1, or the actual 1.0, every version that comes out is more worthy than the last.

Vikaton commented Feb 8, 2015

Rust is improving every day, whether performance or features, or even both, so I think It can wait until beta1, or the actual 1.0, every version that comes out is more worthy than the last.

@fbernier

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fbernier

fbernier May 21, 2015

Rust 1.0 has now been released. I guess it would be worth putting some more work into this.

fbernier commented May 21, 2015

Rust 1.0 has now been released. I guess it would be worth putting some more work into this.

@steveklabnik

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@steveklabnik

steveklabnik May 31, 2015

Contributor

oh, i missed this PR, and wrote up #1636 . Time to compare!

Contributor

steveklabnik commented May 31, 2015

oh, i missed this PR, and wrote up #1636 . Time to compare!

@torhve torhve referenced this pull request May 31, 2015

Merged

Add Rust #1636

@msmith-techempower

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@msmith-techempower

msmith-techempower Jun 5, 2015

Member

Closing in favor of #1638

Member

msmith-techempower commented Jun 5, 2015

Closing in favor of #1638

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment