TC for master is moved to Ignite 2.0 test suite

[Alexey Goncharuk]

Igniters,

Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the PublicAPI, we
had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the build plan
from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From this
moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14 test
suites shorter than the previous plan.

Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!

--AG

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Fantastic news, thank you guys! Though, I still see "Basic" and "Binary
Object Basic" suites. Should we drop one of them as well?

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the PublicAPI, we
> had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the build plan
> from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From this
> moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14 test
> suites shorter than the previous plan.
>
> Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!
>
> --AG
>

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Hi, Vladimir,

There is a chance that in
http://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=Ignite20Tests&tab=projectOverview
some
configs are for binary + simple oblect names (no package name) tests.

But if there is some suspicious link that is candidate to removal, please
feel free to contact me.

Best Regards,
Dmitry Pavlov

вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:24, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:

> Fantastic news, thank you guys! Though, I still see "Basic" and "Binary
> Object Basic" suites. Should we drop one of them as well?
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the PublicAPI, we
> > had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the build
> plan
> > from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From this
> > moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14 test
> > suites shorter than the previous plan.
> >
> > Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!
> >
> > --AG
> >
>

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Pavel,

Yes, these two:
http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBasic
http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBinaryBasic

They both execute org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteBasicTestSuite. Looks
like we should merge them accurately.

On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi, Vladimir,
>
> There is a chance that in
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=Ignite20Tests&tab=
> projectOverview
> some
> configs are for binary + simple oblect names (no package name) tests.
>
> But if there is some suspicious link that is candidate to removal, please
> feel free to contact me.
>
> Best Regards,
> Dmitry Pavlov
>
> вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:24, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:
>
> > Fantastic news, thank you guys! Though, I still see "Basic" and "Binary
> > Object Basic" suites. Should we drop one of them as well?
> >
> > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the PublicAPI,
> we
> > > had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the build
> > plan
> > > from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From this
> > > moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14 test
> > > suites shorter than the previous plan.
> > >
> > > Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!
> > >
> > > --AG
> > >
> >
>

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Yes, we can merge 'binary basic' into 'basic' with adding following tests
into 'basic':
o.a.i.internal.processors.cache.IgniteMarshallerCacheClassNameConflictTest
-testCachePutGetClassesWithNameConflict()

o.a.i.internal.processors.cache.IgniteMarshallerCacheClientRequestsMappingOnMissTest
-testAllNodesDieOnRequest()
-testNoNodesDieOnRequest()
-testOneNodeDiesOnRequest()
-testRequestedMappingIsStoredInFS()
-testTwoNodesDieOnRequest()

it will save 37 minutes of agent time more. I'll prepare PR

Best Regards,
Dmitry Pavlov


вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:43, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:

> Pavel,
>
> Yes, these two:
>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBasic
>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBinaryBasic
>
> They both execute org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteBasicTestSuite. Looks
> like we should merge them accurately.
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Vladimir,
> >
> > There is a chance that in
> > http://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=Ignite20Tests&tab=
> > projectOverview
> > some
> > configs are for binary + simple oblect names (no package name) tests.
> >
> > But if there is some suspicious link that is candidate to removal, please
> > feel free to contact me.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Dmitry Pavlov
> >
> > вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:24, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > > Fantastic news, thank you guys! Though, I still see "Basic" and "Binary
> > > Object Basic" suites. Should we drop one of them as well?
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the
> PublicAPI,
> > we
> > > > had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the build
> > > plan
> > > > from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From
> this
> > > > moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14 test
> > > > suites shorter than the previous plan.
> > > >
> > > > Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!
> > > >
> > > > --AG
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,


Please review PR with 'Binary Basic' merge into 'Basic'
https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1991


After PR is merged it will be possible to remove snapshot dependency from
‘Run All’ to  ‘Binary Basic’

and remove run configuration.

Best Regards,

Dmitry Pavlov

PS. TC run

http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=625386&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=Ignite20Tests_IgniteBinaryBasic
(Without tests)

http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=625387&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=Ignite20Tests_IgniteBasic


вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 13:33, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>:

> Yes, we can merge 'binary basic' into 'basic' with adding following tests
> into 'basic':
> o.a.i.internal.processors.cache.IgniteMarshallerCacheClassNameConflictTest
> -testCachePutGetClassesWithNameConflict()
>
>
> o.a.i.internal.processors.cache.IgniteMarshallerCacheClientRequestsMappingOnMissTest
> -testAllNodesDieOnRequest()
> -testNoNodesDieOnRequest()
> -testOneNodeDiesOnRequest()
> -testRequestedMappingIsStoredInFS()
> -testTwoNodesDieOnRequest()
>
> it will save 37 minutes of agent time more. I'll prepare PR
>
> Best Regards,
> Dmitry Pavlov
>
>
> вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:43, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Pavel,
>>
>> Yes, these two:
>>
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBasic
>>
>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBinaryBasic
>>
>> They both execute org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteBasicTestSuite. Looks
>> like we should merge them accurately.
>>
>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi, Vladimir,
>> >
>> > There is a chance that in
>> > http://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=Ignite20Tests&tab=
>> > projectOverview
>> > some
>> > configs are for binary + simple oblect names (no package name) tests.
>> >
>> > But if there is some suspicious link that is candidate to removal,
>> please
>> > feel free to contact me.
>> >
>> > Best Regards,
>> > Dmitry Pavlov
>> >
>> > вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:24, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:
>> >
>> > > Fantastic news, thank you guys! Though, I still see "Basic" and
>> "Binary
>> > > Object Basic" suites. Should we drop one of them as well?
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
>> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Igniters,
>> > > >
>> > > > Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the
>> PublicAPI,
>> > we
>> > > > had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the
>> build
>> > > plan
>> > > > from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From
>> this
>> > > > moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14
>> test
>> > > > suites shorter than the previous plan.
>> > > >
>> > > > Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!
>> > > >
>> > > > --AG
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

[Dmitriy Pavlov]

Hi Igniters,



'Ignite Binary Objects Basic' run configuration has been also removed from
'Ignite 2.0 Tests' chain.



Thanks Vladimir for pointing this out.



Please share ideas on what else can be optimized in the build/test process.



Best Regards,

Dmitriy Pavlov


вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 14:54, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>:

> Hi Igniters,
>
>
> Please review PR with 'Binary Basic' merge into 'Basic'
> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1991
>
>
> After PR is merged it will be possible to remove snapshot dependency from
> ‘Run All’ to  ‘Binary Basic’
>
> and remove run configuration.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Dmitry Pavlov
>
> PS. TC run
>
>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=625386&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=Ignite20Tests_IgniteBinaryBasic
> (Without tests)
>
>
> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=625387&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=Ignite20Tests_IgniteBasic
>
>
> вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 13:33, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Yes, we can merge 'binary basic' into 'basic' with adding following tests
>> into 'basic':
>> o.a.i.internal.processors.cache.IgniteMarshallerCacheClassNameConflictTest
>> -testCachePutGetClassesWithNameConflict()
>>
>>
>> o.a.i.internal.processors.cache.IgniteMarshallerCacheClientRequestsMappingOnMissTest
>> -testAllNodesDieOnRequest()
>> -testNoNodesDieOnRequest()
>> -testOneNodeDiesOnRequest()
>> -testRequestedMappingIsStoredInFS()
>> -testTwoNodesDieOnRequest()
>>
>> it will save 37 minutes of agent time more. I'll prepare PR
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Dmitry Pavlov
>>
>>
>> вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:43, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> Pavel,
>>>
>>> Yes, these two:
>>>
>>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBasic
>>>
>>> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/admin/editBuildParams.html?id=buildType:Ignite20Tests_IgniteBinaryBasic
>>>
>>> They both execute org.apache.ignite.testsuites.IgniteBasicTestSuite.
>>> Looks
>>> like we should merge them accurately.
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:27 AM, Dmitry Pavlov <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi, Vladimir,
>>> >
>>> > There is a chance that in
>>> > http://ci.ignite.apache.org/project.html?projectId=Ignite20Tests&tab=
>>> > projectOverview
>>> > some
>>> > configs are for binary + simple oblect names (no package name) tests.
>>> >
>>> > But if there is some suspicious link that is candidate to removal,
>>> please
>>> > feel free to contact me.
>>> >
>>> > Best Regards,
>>> > Dmitry Pavlov
>>> >
>>> > вт, 23 мая 2017 г. в 10:24, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>:
>>> >
>>> > > Fantastic news, thank you guys! Though, I still see "Basic" and
>>> "Binary
>>> > > Object Basic" suites. Should we drop one of them as well?
>>> > >
>>> > > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Alexey Goncharuk <
>>> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Igniters,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Since we removed OptimizedMarshaller in Ignite 2.0 from the
>>> PublicAPI,
>>> > we
>>> > > > had a chance to remove several unnecessary test suites from the
>>> build
>>> > > plan
>>> > > > from Ignite 2.0. I pushed the changes for IGNITE-4947 ticket. From
>>> this
>>> > > > moment you should run tests from Ignite 2.0 project, which is 14
>>> test
>>> > > > suites shorter than the previous plan.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Kudos to Alexander Paschenko and Dmitriy Pavlov!
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --AG
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>