treebase-devel

[Treebase-devel] junit test

[youjun g. <you...@ya...>]

Hilmar and All,

There are 10 failed test and 29 errors need to be fixed on TreeBASE.  The
possibly cause include:

1. main java code change without synchronizing with the test suite;
2. database schema change without synchronizing with the test suite;
3. testing recode was lost from the database table;
4. other issue like mesquite

I think one developer can fix 4-5 of them per working day, because most of
us will not work from Dec 23rd to Jan 3rd, I expect the whole work can be
done by Jan 8th-10th.

Rutger, can I send you those failed test that related to mesquite? There
maybe 2-3 of them. I can finish the rest unless by working on them I found
my estimation about the due day is too optimistic.

I will let you know then.

Thanks

Youjun  .

Re: [Treebase-devel] junit test

[Hilmar L. <hl...@ne...>]

Thanks for the update, Youjun. I entered Jan 11 as target date into  
our release plan.

	-hilmar

On Dec 21, 2009, at 10:09 AM, youjun guo wrote:

> Hilmar and All,
>
> There are 10 failed test and 29 errors need to be fixed on  
> TreeBASE.  The possibly cause include:
>
> 1. main java code change without synchronizing with the test suite;
> 2. database schema change without synchronizing with the test suite;
> 3. testing recode was lost from the database table;
> 4. other issue like mesquite
>
> I think one developer can fix 4-5 of them per working day, because  
> most of us will not work from Dec 23rd to Jan 3rd, I expect the  
> whole work can be done by Jan 8th-10th.
>
> Rutger, can I send you those failed test that related to mesquite?  
> There maybe 2-3 of them. I can finish the rest unless by working on  
> them I found my estimation about the due day is too optimistic.
>
> I will let you know then.
>
> Thanks
>
> Youjun  .

-- 
===========================================================
: Hilmar Lapp  -:- Durham, NC -:- informatics.nescent.org :
===========================================================

Re: [Treebase-devel] junit test

[Vladimir G. <vla...@du...>]

It would be very helpful for my introduction to the project if I could  
participate in repairing some of the unit tests.  I would need some  
hand-holding in the beginning, though.
Youjun, when you identify some tests from category #1, could you pass  
2-3 simpler ones to me and could we talk then about what I should do  
to fix them?
--Vladimir


On Dec 21, 2009, at 10:09 AM, youjun guo wrote:

> Hilmar and All,
>
> There are 10 failed test and 29 errors need to be fixed on  
> TreeBASE.  The possibly cause include:
>
> 1. main java code change without synchronizing with the test suite;
> 2. database schema change without synchronizing with the test suite;
> 3. testing recode was lost from the database table;
> 4. other issue like mesquite
>
> I think one developer can fix 4-5 of them per working day, because  
> most of us will not work from Dec 23rd to Jan 3rd, I expect the  
> whole work can be done by Jan 8th-10th.
>
> Rutger, can I send you those failed test that related to mesquite?  
> There maybe 2-3 of them. I can finish the rest unless by working on  
> them I found my estimation about the due day is too optimistic.
>
> I will let you know then.
>
> Thanks
>
> Youjun  .
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
> Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
> A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast  
> and easy
> Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev  
> _______________________________________________
> Treebase-devel mailing list
> Tre...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/treebase-devel

Re: [Treebase-devel] junit test

[youjun g. <you...@ya...>]

Hi, Vladimir,

There are quit a few unit test failed due to the hibernate sequence problem,
do you want to join me and work on them?  What is the plan or solution in
your mind?

Youjun

On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Vladimir Gapeyev <vla...@du...
> wrote:

> It would be very helpful for my introduction to the project if I could
> participate in repairing some of the unit tests.  I would need some
> hand-holding in the beginning, though.
> Youjun, when you identify some tests from category #1, could you pass
> 2-3 simpler ones to me and could we talk then about what I should do
> to fix them?
> --Vladimir
>
>
> On Dec 21, 2009, at 10:09 AM, youjun guo wrote:
>
> > Hilmar and All,
> >
> > There are 10 failed test and 29 errors need to be fixed on
> > TreeBASE.  The possibly cause include:
> >
> > 1. main java code change without synchronizing with the test suite;
> > 2. database schema change without synchronizing with the test suite;
> > 3. testing recode was lost from the database table;
> > 4. other issue like mesquite
> >
> > I think one developer can fix 4-5 of them per working day, because
> > most of us will not work from Dec 23rd to Jan 3rd, I expect the
> > whole work can be done by Jan 8th-10th.
> >
> > Rutger, can I send you those failed test that related to mesquite?
> > There maybe 2-3 of them. I can finish the rest unless by working on
> > them I found my estimation about the due day is too optimistic.
> >
> > I will let you know then.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Youjun  .
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
> > Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
> > A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast
> > and easy
> > Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Treebase-devel mailing list
> > Tre...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/treebase-devel
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
> Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
> A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and
> easy
> Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Treebase-devel mailing list
> Tre...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/treebase-devel
>

[Treebase-devel] Resolving the hibernate_sequence problem & another db instance

[Vladimir G. <vla...@du...>]

On Jan 5, 2010, at 3:12 PM, youjun guo wrote:

> Hi, Vladimir,
>
> There are quit a few unit test failed due to the hibernate sequence  
> problem, do you want to join me and work on them?  What is the plan  
> or solution in your mind?
>


The plan, as Hilmar, you, and I decided at the beginning of the  
conference call on Monday, is to re-direct postgres tables to use  
hibernate_sequence, instead of their individual sequences, for new PK  
IDs.  (The other solution we discussed would be to  change Java code  
(or Hibernate XML mappings?) to use the tables' individual sequences  
instead of hibernate_sequence.)

Since the plan constitutes a significant adjustment to the DB schema,  
we should take care against messing up our only database instance,  
currently treebasedev.  So, Jon is now working on creating and  
populating another database instance (treebaseprod), that we will use  
as an "untouchable" production instance while we proceed with risky  
development work on treebasedev. That is, we started moving towards  
the infrastructure we have earlier outlined at http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/treebase/index.php?title=Infrastructure_and_Deployment_plan 
.  (There will be changes to names, ports, etc. -- I'll let everyone  
know as soon as they are done.)

So, we have to postpone these particular unit tests until these two db  
instances are in place.

As part of the above work, we are figuring out how to move the DB  
connection info (url, username, password) from the WAR file into  
tomcat's JNDI configuration. I'll be in touch as soon as we are ready  
to make TB code adjustments to achieve that.

--Vladimir 

Re: [Treebase-devel] Resolving the hibernate_sequence problem & another db instance

[Rutger V. <rut...@gm...>]

> The plan, as Hilmar, you, and I decided at the beginning of the
> conference call on Monday, is to re-direct postgres tables to use
> hibernate_sequence, instead of their individual sequences, for new PK
> IDs.  (The other solution we discussed would be to  change Java code
> (or Hibernate XML mappings?) to use the tables' individual sequences
> instead of hibernate_sequence.)

Wait, I'm confused, is that the plan? I thought the plan was the other
way around: we use the tables' individual sequences, which means we
set the hibernate mode for generating IDs to "NATIVE" instead of
"SEQUENCE". Am I the only one who understood this exactly the wrong
way around?

-- 
Dr. Rutger A. Vos
School of Biological Sciences
Philip Lyle Building, Level 4
University of Reading
Reading
RG6 6BX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0) 118 378 7535
http://www.nexml.org
http://rutgervos.blogspot.com

Re: [Treebase-devel] Resolving the hibernate_sequence problem & another db instance

[Vladimir G. <vla...@du...>]

On Jan 7, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Rutger Vos wrote:

>> The plan, as Hilmar, you, and I decided at the beginning of the
>> conference call on Monday, is to re-direct postgres tables to use
>> hibernate_sequence, instead of their individual sequences, for new PK
>> IDs.  (The other solution we discussed would be to  change Java code
>> (or Hibernate XML mappings?) to use the tables' individual sequences
>> instead of hibernate_sequence.)
>
> Wait, I'm confused, is that the plan? I thought the plan was the other
> way around: we use the tables' individual sequences, which means we
> set the hibernate mode for generating IDs to "NATIVE" instead of
> "SEQUENCE". Am I the only one who understood this exactly the wrong
> way around?

That's what transpired from our discussion on Monday, before other  
people called in; we felt that prior email discussion did not reach a  
definite conclusion.

The outcome was influenced, as I recall, by Youjun's and Hilmar's  
observations that using a common sequence for all the tables is common  
practice in the Oracle world and a necessity in the MySQL world  
(keeping in mind a possibility of switching away from Postgres in the  
future), as well as the fact that this is how TB code works now and  
were not sure that nothing depended on this arrangement.

A volunteer to resume and lead the discussion to determine the more  
correct among the two (or more?) solutions?

My only reason for having held Youjun from proceeding one way or the  
other was the concern for messing up the only db instance we had.   
We'll soon have additional instances, so this will not be a roadblock.

--Vladimir