Skip to content
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

New XTS integration tests #4928

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

ochaloup
Copy link
Contributor

Changed tests based on narayana XTS tests. More details at https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBQA-7126.

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 455 is now running using a merge of 3b9539536bf0ff460f7344d9b495377f37fb9b04

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 455 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 3b9539536bf0ff460f7344d9b495377f37fb9b04
Summary: Tests failed: 2 (2 new), passed: 4405, ignored: 83 Build time: 1:30:30

Failed tests

org.jboss.as.test.clustering.cluster.ejb3.stateless.RemoteStatelessFailoverTestCase(SYNC-tcp).testLoadBalance: java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<2> but was:<1>
    at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
    at org.junit.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:743)

org.jboss.as.test.clustering.cluster.ejb3.stateless.RemoteStatelessFailoverTestCase(SYNC-tcp).testFailoverOnStop: java.util.ConcurrentModificationException
    at java.util.HashMap$HashIterator.nextEntry(HashMap.java:894)
    at java.util.HashMap$KeyIterator.next(HashMap.java:928)

@paulrobinson
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like an intermittent failure to me:

retest this please

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 465 is now running using a merge of 3b9539536bf0ff460f7344d9b495377f37fb9b04

.addPackage(EventLog.class.getPackage())
.addPackage(BaseFunctionalTest.class.getPackage())

.addAsResource("context-handlers.xml") // is this needed?
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, it is is still needed to setup the server-side handler chain. We are working on inferring this and adding automatically in the subsystem.

@paulrobinson
Copy link
Contributor

You may want to squash the commits as they all relate to the same issue.

@paulrobinson
Copy link
Contributor

I think you need to remove MockSet and all it's usages. I don't think it has any active role in the tests? See my previous comment about how I think it got included.

private static final Logger log = Logger.getLogger(ATClient.class);

private static final String NODE0_ADDR = System.getProperty("node0", "localhost");
//TODO: parameterize this - /socket-binding-group=standard-sockets/socket-binding=http:read-attribute(name=port)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you need to do this? I agree you would need this for regular code, but for tests?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@bstansberry Does the todo need addressing for tests?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, hard coding 8080 is fine.

The handling of NODE0_ADDR needs fixing though. The string needs to be passed through a routine like org.jboss.as.network.NetworkUtils.formatPossibleIpv6Address(...) before it can be used in the URL at L53 below. We commonly configure CI runs to bind node0 to an IPv6 address.

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 465 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 3b9539536bf0ff460f7344d9b495377f37fb9b04
Summary: Tests passed: 4407, ignored: 83 Build time: 1:36:11

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 209 is now running using a merge of 3b9539536bf0ff460f7344d9b495377f37fb9b04

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 209 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of 3b9539536bf0ff460f7344d9b495377f37fb9b04
Summary: Tests passed: 4412, ignored: 84 Build time: 1:10:8

@bstansberry
Copy link
Contributor

@paulrobinson -- given the number of comments you've had on this, I'm not going to try and figure out when they've been satisfactorily addressed. So when this PR is ok with you, please be sure and add a comment explicitly approving it.

Thanks!

@paulrobinson
Copy link
Contributor

No problem @bstansberry,I'll keep an eye on it. I am on Holiday until the 26th August, so may not reply immediately.

try {
userTransaction = UserTransactionFactory.userTransaction();
String transactionId = userTransaction.transactionIdentifier();
System.out.println("RestaurantServiceAT transaction id =" + transactionId);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

system out an log? in same test?

@ochaloup
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi,

thank you for the comments.

@paulrobinson: I've removed MockSet object. Initially I thought that it is fine to "simulate" some business logic. And I've squashed the commits as you proposed.
@bstansberry: Thanks. I used the proposed NetworkUtils.formatPossibleIpv6Address method.
@ctomc: Sorry, my mistake. Changed to be looged by logger

@jaikiran
Copy link
Contributor

retest this please

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 258 is now running using a merge of dc021c1414bf84037a9de8069641f4eb4f206539

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 258 outcome was SUCCESS using a merge of dc021c1414bf84037a9de8069641f4eb4f206539
Summary: Tests passed: 4426, ignored: 84 Build time: 1:12:46

@paulrobinson
Copy link
Contributor

@bstansberry All my comments have been satisfactorily addressed.

@bstansberry
Copy link
Contributor

@paulrobinson thanks

So, whoever next merges a set of pulls (maybe me!!), this is good to go.

.addAsWebInfResource(EmptyAsset.INSTANCE, ArchivePaths.create("beans.xml"))
.addAsManifestResource(new StringAsset("Dependencies: org.jboss.xts,org.jboss.jts\n"), "MANIFEST.MF");

File testPackage = new File("/tmp", ARCHIVE_NAME + ".war");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This fails on windows for obvious reasons. Is this used anywhere in the test? If not, better just remove this.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here's the exception stacktrace for reference:

       Caused by: org.jboss.shrinkwrap.api.exporter.ArchiveExportException: File could not be created: \tmp\wsba-coordinatorcompletition-test.war
at org.jboss.shrinkwrap.impl.base.exporter.AbstractStreamExporterImpl.getOutputStreamToFile(AbstractStreamExporterImpl.java:95)
at org.jboss.shrinkwrap.impl.base.exporter.AbstractStreamExporterImpl.exportTo(AbstractStreamExporterImpl.java:144)
at org.jboss.as.test.xts.wsba.coordinatorcompletion.client.BACoordinatorCompletionTestCase.createTestArchive(BACoordinatorCompletionTestCase.java:84)
... 59 more

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no, you are absolutely right. It has nothing to do in the code. That was my inattention which left the code at the place. I've checked it and I hope that there won't be more stuff like that. I removed that from the pull request. Sorry.

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 310 is now running using a merge of 76207f7

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 310 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 76207f7
Summary: Execution timeout (new); tests failed: 7 (7 new), passed: 4241, ignored: 81; org.wildfly:wildfly-ts-integ-manualmode Build time: 2:0:9

Failed tests

org.jboss.as.test.smoke.webservices.WSTestCase.testManagementDescription: java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException
    at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerGet(FutureTask.java:258)
    at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.get(FutureTask.java:119)

org.jboss.as.test.integration.ejb.timerservice.schedule.SimpleScheduleSecondTestCase.testScheduleMethodTimeout: java.lang.AssertionError
    at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:86)
    at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)

org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.messaging.HornetQBackupActivationTestCase.testActiveBackupReload: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelValue.asBoolean(ModelValue.java:66)
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelNode.asBoolean(ModelNode.java:262)

org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.messaging.HornetQBackupActivationTestCase.testPassiveBackupReload: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelValue.asBoolean(ModelValue.java:66)
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelNode.asBoolean(ModelNode.java:262)

org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.messaging.HornetQBackupActivationTestCase.testBackupActivation: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelValue.asBoolean(ModelValue.java:66)
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelNode.asBoolean(ModelNode.java:262)

org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.messaging.HornetQBackupActivationTestCase.testLiveReload: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelValue.asBoolean(ModelValue.java:66)
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelNode.asBoolean(ModelNode.java:262)

org.jboss.as.test.manualmode.messaging.HornetQBackupActivationTestCase.testBackupFailoverAfterFailback: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelValue.asBoolean(ModelValue.java:66)
    at org.jboss.dmr.ModelNode.asBoolean(ModelNode.java:262)

@ochaloup
Copy link
Contributor Author

the fails seems to me not to be connected with the pull request

retest this please

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 312 is now running using a merge of 76207f7

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 312 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 76207f7
Summary: Tests failed: 1, passed: 4328, ignored: 83 Build time: 1:40:34

Failed tests

org.jboss.as.test.smoke.webservices.WSTestCase.testManagementDescription: java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException
    at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerGet(FutureTask.java:258)
    at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.get(FutureTask.java:119)

@n1hility
Copy link
Member

merging

@n1hility
Copy link
Member

merged

@n1hility n1hility closed this Aug 28, 2013
@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 364 is now running using a merge of 76207f7

@wildfly-ci
Copy link

Build 364 outcome was FAILURE using a merge of 76207f7
Summary: Tests failed: 1 (1 new), passed: 4525, ignored: 86 Build time: 1:22:0

Failed tests

org.jboss.as.test.integration.domain.suites.DomainTestSuite: org.jboss.as.test.integration.domain.suites.DeploymentManagementTestCase.testFullReplaceViaHash: java.lang.AssertionError: /opt/buildAgent/work/340a2b56aab3b1db/testsuite/domain/target/domains/DomainTestSuite/master/data/content/21
    at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:88)
    at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants