-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.3k
Suppressing some tests which fail in CI #3799
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
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -11,13 +11,15 @@ | |
| import java.util.Arrays; | ||
| import java.util.List; | ||
| import java.util.concurrent.Future; | ||
| import org.junit.Ignore; | ||
|
|
||
| //TODO merge it within PluginTest after the security release | ||
| public class PluginSEC925Test { | ||
|
|
||
| @Rule | ||
| public JenkinsRule r = new JenkinsRule(); | ||
|
|
||
| @Ignore("TODO observed to fail in CI with 404 due to external UC issues") | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Should perhaps get a workaround applied similar to #3962?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Possibly. Does not look like I thought to record a copy of the failure message. Probably best to rewrite tests like these to not attempt to make an Internet connection to begin with, and instead use some hard-coded example JSON data. |
||
| @Test | ||
| @Issue("SECURITY-925") | ||
| public void preventTimestamp2_toBeServed() throws Exception { | ||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -73,6 +73,7 @@ | |
| import javax.servlet.ServletException; | ||
| import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletRequest; | ||
| import javax.servlet.http.HttpServletResponse; | ||
| import org.junit.Ignore; | ||
|
|
||
| public class CLITest { | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -256,6 +257,7 @@ public void redirectToEndpointShouldBeFollowed() throws Exception { | |
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @Ignore("TODO sometimes fails, in CI & locally") | ||
|
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. #3708 does not seem to have worked reliably. |
||
| @Test | ||
| @Issue("JENKINS-54310") | ||
| public void readInputAtOnce() throws Exception { | ||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ | ||
| package hudson.util; | ||
|
|
||
| import org.junit.ClassRule; | ||
| import org.junit.Ignore; | ||
| import org.junit.Test; | ||
| import org.jvnet.hudson.test.Issue; | ||
| import org.jvnet.hudson.test.JenkinsRule; | ||
|
|
@@ -23,6 +24,7 @@ public class AtomicFileWriterPerfTest { | |
| * So using slightly more than the worse value obtained above should avoid making this flaky and still catch | ||
| * <strong>really</strong> bad performance regressions. | ||
| */ | ||
| @Ignore("TODO often fails in CI") | ||
|
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. As above, perhaps just assume not running in CI?
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I like that idea, because this test is unlikely to ever fail in a normal environment (I mean something built after ~1995), and at the same time I feel a bit bad if tests run locally are not the same as in CI. I see potential interesting headaches for some people if some tests fail locally but not in CI (though I suppose a comment would help about this...)
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Possibly so, but performance tests are not suitable as merge/deploy gates—I could be patching Better to have these in a separate job (repo?) where they are run say on a daily basis with some kind of tooling to track trends and alert developers to consistent regressions. |
||
| @Issue("JENKINS-34855") | ||
| @Test(timeout = 50 * 1000L) | ||
| public void poorManPerformanceTestBed() throws Exception { | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Has long been flaky. #3787 forgot this one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps better to assume not running in a CI environment? https://github.com/auchenberg/volkswagen/ light?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Already in progress for this one in #3721. Otherwise we will have 2
@Ignoreand the compilation will fail. (Sorry "ignore" user for the ping)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, would just be a trivial merge conflict.