Skip to content

[SPARK-5783] Better eventlog-parsing error messages #4573

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

[SPARK-5783] Better eventlog-parsing error messages #4573

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

@ryan-williams
Copy link
Contributor

@ryan-williams ryan-williams commented Feb 12, 2015

No description provided.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 12, 2015

Test build #27372 has started for PR 4573 at commit 98aa3fe.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 12, 2015

Test build #27372 has finished for PR 4573 at commit 98aa3fe.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

AmplabJenkins commented Feb 12, 2015

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/27372/
Test FAILed.

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

andrewor14 commented Feb 12, 2015

looks good, but it doesn't compile

@ryan-williams
Copy link
Contributor Author

ryan-williams commented Feb 12, 2015

ha yea, need to update test call-sites, brb

@ryan-williams
Copy link
Contributor Author

ryan-williams commented Feb 12, 2015

hopefully fixed now

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 12, 2015

Test build #27379 has started for PR 4573 at commit a8647ec.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 12, 2015

Test build #27379 has finished for PR 4573 at commit a8647ec.

  • This patch fails Spark unit tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

AmplabJenkins commented Feb 12, 2015

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/27379/
Test FAILed.

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

andrewor14 commented Feb 12, 2015

retest this please

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 12, 2015

Test build #27388 has started for PR 4573 at commit a8647ec.

  • This patch merges cleanly.

@SparkQA
Copy link

SparkQA commented Feb 12, 2015

Test build #27388 has finished for PR 4573 at commit a8647ec.

  • This patch passes all tests.
  • This patch merges cleanly.
  • This patch adds no public classes.

@AmplabJenkins
Copy link

AmplabJenkins commented Feb 12, 2015

Test PASSed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/SparkPullRequestBuilder/27388/
Test PASSed.

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

andrewor14 commented Feb 13, 2015

Thanks merging into master and 1.3

asfgit pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 13, 2015
@ryan-williams
[SPARK-5783] Better eventlog-parsing error messages
e5690a5 
Author: Ryan Williams <[email protected]>

Closes #4573 from ryan-williams/history and squashes the following commits:

a8647ec [Ryan Williams] fix test calls to .replay()
98aa3fe [Ryan Williams] include filename in history-parsing error message
8deecf0 [Ryan Williams] add line number to history-parsing error message
b668b52 [Ryan Williams] add log info line to history-eventlog parsing
@asfgit asfgit closed this in fc6d3e7 Feb 13, 2015
@ryan-williams
Copy link
Contributor Author

ryan-williams commented Feb 13, 2015

thanks @andrewor14! OOC, what was your calculus for judging build 27379 above to have been a spurious failure and asking for a retest? I'd looked at it and optimistically thought that maybe that was the situation, but was not sure.

@andrewor14
Copy link
Contributor

andrewor14 commented Feb 13, 2015

We've seen flaky objenesis failures taking down a range of tests before. Hopefully this was fixed with a recent patch that was merged: #4578

@ryan-williams ryan-williams mentioned this pull request Feb 14, 2015
Closed
@pwendell
Copy link
Contributor

pwendell commented Feb 15, 2015

Thanks @ryan-williams - this is a useful feature.

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

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@ryan-williams @SparkQA @AmplabJenkins @andrewor14 @pwendell