Issue 15152: test_subprocess failures on awfully slow builtbots (original) (raw)
Created on 2012-06-23 09:07 by neologix, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.
Messages (6)
Author: Charles-François Natali (neologix) * 
Date: 2012-06-23 09:07
Some test_subprocess tests are failing on really slow buildbots, such as the Ubtuntu ARM one: """
ERROR: test_wait_timeout (test.test_subprocess.ProcessTestCase)
Traceback (most recent call last): File "/var/lib/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.warsaw-ubuntu-arm/build/Lib/test/test_subprocess.py", line 718, in test_wait_timeout self.assertEqual(p.wait(timeout=3), 0) File "/var/lib/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.warsaw-ubuntu-arm/build/Lib/subprocess.py", line 1494, in wait raise TimeoutExpired(self.args, timeout) subprocess.TimeoutExpired: Command '['/var/lib/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.warsaw-ubuntu-arm/build/python', '-c', 'import time; time.sleep(0.1)']' timed out after 3 seconds
====================================================================== FAIL: test_check_output_timeout (test.test_subprocess.ProcessTestCase)
Traceback (most recent call last): File "/var/lib/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.warsaw-ubuntu-arm/build/Lib/test/test_subprocess.py", line 140, in test_check_output_timeout self.assertEqual(c.exception.output, b'BDFL') AssertionError: b'' != b'BDFL'
====================================================================== FAIL: test_check_output_timeout (test.test_subprocess.ProcessTestCaseNoPoll)
Traceback (most recent call last): File "/var/lib/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.warsaw-ubuntu-arm/build/Lib/test/test_subprocess.py", line 140, in test_check_output_timeout self.assertEqual(c.exception.output, b'BDFL') AssertionError: b'' != b'BDFL' """
The timeouts for those tests are already at 3 seconds. We could double them to 6 seconds and see if things get better: that would increase the running time on all the buildbots, though. Any other idea?
Author: Antoine Pitrou (pitrou) *
Date: 2012-06-23 09:41
Barry (the buildbot owner) could take a look.
Author: R. David Murray (r.david.murray) *
Date: 2012-06-24 15:13
You could make the test a loop, with the timeout increasing each time through the loop, failing only if all tries fail. That way on faster machines the test will pass faster. It'll take even longer on slow machines, but they are slow anyway so that may be acceptable.
Author: Charles-François Natali (neologix) *
Date: 2012-06-25 17:35
You could make the test a loop, with the timeout increasing each time through the loop, failing only if all tries fail. That way on faster machines the test will pass faster. It'll take even longer on slow machines, but they are slow anyway so that may be acceptable.
Yes, sure, but then it'll only make the test non determinist: let's say there's a non reproductible bug in subprocess' timeout implementation, if we retry upon error, it won't get caught unless if fails a couple time in a row, which may never happen. The idea is to have a timeout large enough so that the probablility of false positives is low enough.
Author: Mark Lawrence (BreamoreBoy) *
Date: 2014-06-29 18:05
Does this issue need to be addressed, can it be closed as "out of date" or what?
Author: Charles-François Natali (neologix) *
Date: 2014-07-31 18:06
Closing, I haven't seen this in a while.
History
Date
User
Action
Args
2022-04-11 14:57:31
admin
set
github: 59357
2014-07-31 18:06:34
neologix
set
status: open -> closed
resolution: out of date
messages: +
stage: needs patch -> resolved
2014-06-29 18:05:20
BreamoreBoy
set
versions: + Python 3.4, Python 3.5, - Python 3.3
nosy: + BreamoreBoy
title: test_subprocess fqailures on awfully slow builtbots -> test_subprocess failures on awfully slow builtbots
messages: +
2012-06-25 17:35:09
neologix
set
messages: +
2012-06-24 15:13:19
r.david.murray
set
nosy: + r.david.murray
messages: +
2012-06-23 09:41:11
pitrou
set
nosy: + barry
messages: +
2012-06-23 09:07:22
neologix
create