List:Commits« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Hema Sridharan Date:June 24 2008 4:54am
Subject:RE: WL#4222 Test patch review
View as plain text  
Hi Chuck,

Please find my new patch for the test of metadata consistency. I modified
the tests according to your review comments. I also executed these tests in
Windows machines today, seems to be working for me. Please see the link
below for the patch

http://lists.mysql.com/commits/48364

Let me know if you are fine with the changes. 


> Hema, 
> 
> I read your summary. I am fine with doing things in 
> increments. But I don't see any plans to do so. Under what WL 
> or BUG report are we tracking the conversion of existing 
> tests to the backup suite? I think there should be a WL 
> associated with that effort.
> 
> > > 13) Once the patch issue was resolved, the result file 
> was different 
> > > but this was due to the patch problem. The same is true for the 
> > > other two tests.
> > > 
> > > 14) Once all those problems were solved, I got this. I surrender. 
> > > Please fix and resubmit a new patch.
> > > 
> > > backup.backup_objectts 'innodb' [ fail ]
> > > 
> > > mysqltest: At line 181: query 'RESTORE FROM 'bup_objectts.bak'' 
> > > failed: 7:
> > > Error
> > >  on rename of '.\bup_objectts\cap.TRG~' to 
> '.\bup_objectts\cap.TRG'
> > > (Errcode: 17
> > > )
> > 
> > 
> > Hema: Oops ! I didn't get this error when I run it in my 
> machine and 
> > thats why I committed the test. I don't know why it is 
> failing in your 
> > machine, please help me out to figure out the delta b/w these 2 
> > systems.Also this error is pertinent to "ALTER TABLE" 
> operation, which 
> > I haven't done in my test case. I don't know from where this error 
> > pops up?
> 
> Line 181 in test backup_objectts while running with InnoDB 
> (see test output). I would suggest you run your tests on 
> Windows in several iterations. This is an intermittent 
> failure -- the worst case. If you run it on Windows and after 
> many attempts do not see the error then I will accept it is 
> isolated to my machine (it's happened before). But we need to be sure.
> 
> I think I need to see another patch before I can approve this to push.
> 
> Chuck
> 
> 

Thread
WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell12 Jun
  • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan13 Jun
    • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell13 Jun
      • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan24 Jun
        • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell30 Jun
          • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan1 Jul
            • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell1 Jul
              • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan2 Jul
                • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell2 Jul
                  • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan3 Jul
                    • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell21 Jul
                      • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan23 Jul
                        • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell23 Jul
                          • Re: WL#4222 Test patch reviewJoerg Bruehe31 Jul
                            • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan1 Aug
                              • Re: WL#4222 Test patch reviewJoerg Bruehe1 Aug
                      • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan7 Aug
                        • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell11 Aug
                          • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan11 Aug
RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewChuck Bell30 Jun
  • RE: WL#4222 Test patch reviewHema Sridharan30 Jun