Skip to content
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

TSDB: fix reindex failed tests without feature flag #81967

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jan 6, 2022

Conversation

weizijun
Copy link
Contributor

@weizijun weizijun commented Dec 21, 2021

fix as the #80945 do.

register a settings update consumer for the end_time for
the tsdb index even when the end_time setting wasn't registered.
Pass the feature flag to reindex yaml tests.

@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine added v8.1.0 external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team labels Dec 21, 2021
@weizijun
Copy link
Contributor Author

hi, @imotov , I fix the tests in #81916

@imotov imotov added :StorageEngine/TSDB You know, for Metrics >bug labels Dec 21, 2021
@elasticmachine elasticmachine added the Team:Analytics Meta label for analytical engine team (ESQL/Aggs/Geo) label Dec 21, 2021
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-analytics-geo (Team:Analytics)

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Dec 21, 2021

@elasticmachine test this please

@imotov imotov self-requested a review December 21, 2021 05:00
@nik9000
Copy link
Member

nik9000 commented Dec 21, 2021 via email

Copy link
Contributor

@imotov imotov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changes in gradle fix the issue I don't think change in TimestampBounds are necessary.

scopedSettings.addSettingsUpdateConsumer(IndexSettings.TIME_SERIES_END_TIME, this::updateEndTime);
if (IndexSettings.isTimeSeriesModeEnabled()) {
scopedSettings.addSettingsUpdateConsumer(IndexSettings.TIME_SERIES_END_TIME, this::updateEndTime);
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure why this is necessary. It seems like TimestampBounds instantiation is already guarded by check for the TIME_SERIES_START_TIME in

this.timestampBounds = TIME_SERIES_START_TIME.exists(settings) ? new TimestampBounds(scopedSettings) : null;

I think @nik9000 had to add this check in #80945 because there was no protection there.
So

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@weizijun could you revert this bit? Or explain why it's needed. Like @imotov says I think I think we won't make a TimestampBounds at all without the feature flag.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But I've been known to be wrong about things.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@imotov @nik9000 sorry, I see it just now, I see igor has removed the code

Copy link
Member

@nik9000 nik9000 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Left a note about the change in the java file.

@mark-vieira mark-vieira added the test-release Trigger CI checks against release build label Jan 5, 2022
@mark-vieira
Copy link
Contributor

@elasticmachine update branch

@mark-vieira
Copy link
Contributor

@elasticmachine test this please

@mark-vieira
Copy link
Contributor

@imotov @nik9000 can we maybe just make the necessary changes here to get this merged. As it is our release test builds have been busted for some time.

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 5, 2022

@mark-vieira my apologizes, will not happen again. I am on it.

@mark-vieira
Copy link
Contributor

mark-vieira commented Jan 5, 2022

No worries. Stuff gets lost in the shuffle over the holidays. Thanks, Igor!

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 5, 2022

@elasticmachine test this please

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 5, 2022

@elasticmachine test this please

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 5, 2022

@elasticmachine run elasticsearch-ci/release-tests

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine run elasticsearch-ci/release-tests

1 similar comment
@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine run elasticsearch-ci/release-tests

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine run elasticsearch-ci/release-tests

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine test this please

@imotov
Copy link
Contributor

imotov commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine run elasticsearch-ci/release-tests

@weizijun
Copy link
Contributor Author

weizijun commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine update branch

@weizijun
Copy link
Contributor Author

weizijun commented Jan 6, 2022

there is another failed test, cause the release check failed:

 ./gradlew ':x-pack:plugin:ml:qa:native-multi-node-tests:javaRestTest' --tests "org.elasticsearch.xpack.ml.integration.PyTorchModelIT.testGetDeploymentStats_WithStartedStoppedDeployments" -Dtests.seed=5E2AFE7B6589657 -Dbuild.snapshot=false -Dtests.jvm.argline="-Dbuild.snapshot=false" -Dtests.locale=ar-TN -Dtests.timezone=America/Campo_Grande -Druntime.java=17

@nik9000 nik9000 removed the test-release Trigger CI checks against release build label Jan 6, 2022
@nik9000
Copy link
Member

nik9000 commented Jan 6, 2022

@elasticmachine, test this please.

@nik9000 nik9000 added auto-backport-and-merge auto-merge-without-approval Automatically merge pull request when CI checks pass (NB doesn't wait for reviews!) labels Jan 6, 2022
@nik9000
Copy link
Member

nik9000 commented Jan 6, 2022

I've removed the test-release flag from this PR. I'll look into that failure and open a follow up PR to fix the release tests. It's nice to have the bot's full trust for fixing that because the build will fail over and over and over and over again....

@nik9000
Copy link
Member

nik9000 commented Jan 6, 2022

I've removed the test-release flag from this PR. I'll look into that failure and open a follow up PR to fix the release tests. It's nice to have the bot's full trust for fixing that because the build will fail over and over and over and over ag

Removing it doesn't stop the tests! Nice. Oh well. I have to do a thing for a bit. I'll look again soon....

@nik9000
Copy link
Member

nik9000 commented Jan 6, 2022

This error isn't ours!

» [2022-01-06T14:48:38,148][ERROR][o.e.x.m.i.p.p.PyTorchResultProcessor] [javaRestTest-2] [foo] Error processing results
»  org.elasticsearch.xcontent.XContentParseException: [2:3] [pytorch_result] unknown field [request_id]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xcontent.ObjectParser.lambda$errorOnUnknown$2(ObjectParser.java:104) ~[elasticsearch-x-content-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xcontent.ObjectParser.parse(ObjectParser.java:316) ~[elasticsearch-x-content-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xcontent.ConstructingObjectParser.parse(ConstructingObjectParser.java:166) ~[elasticsearch-x-content-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xcontent.ConstructingObjectParser.apply(ConstructingObjectParser.java:158) ~[elasticsearch-x-content-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xpack.ml.process.ProcessResultsParser$ResultIterator.next(ProcessResultsParser.java:86) ~[x-pack-ml-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xpack.ml.inference.pytorch.process.PyTorchResultProcessor.process(PyTorchResultProcessor.java:62) [x-pack-ml-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.xpack.ml.inference.deployment.DeploymentManager.lambda$doStartDeployment$2(DeploymentManager.java:135) [x-pack-ml-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at org.elasticsearch.common.util.concurrent.ThreadContext$ContextPreservingRunnable.run(ThreadContext.java:716) [elasticsearch-8.1.0.jar:8.1.0]
»       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136) [?:?]
»       at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635) [?:?]
»       at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:833) [?:?]

I'm going to merge this and ping the ml folks with this error.

@nik9000
Copy link
Member

nik9000 commented Jan 6, 2022

I reproduced with:

./gradlew ':x-pack:plugin:ml:qa:native-multi-node-tests:javaRestTest' --tests "org.elasticsearch.xpack.ml.integration.PyTorchModelIT.testGetDeploymentStats_WithStartedStoppedDeployments" -Dtests.seed=5E2AFE7B6589657 -Dbuild.snapshot=false -Dtests.jvm.argline="-Dbuild.snapshot=false" -Dtests.locale=ar-TN -Dtests.timezone=America/Campo_Grande -Druntime.java=17 -Dlicense.key="x-pack/license-tools/src/test/resources/public.key"

@weizijun
Copy link
Contributor Author

weizijun commented Jan 7, 2022

thanks @imotov @nik9000

astefan pushed a commit to astefan/elasticsearch that referenced this pull request Jan 7, 2022
fix as the elastic#80945 do.

register a settings update consumer for the end_time for
the tsdb index even when the end_time setting wasn't registered.
Pass the feature flag to reindex yaml tests.

Co-authored-by: Igor Motov <[email protected]>
astefan pushed a commit to astefan/elasticsearch that referenced this pull request Jan 7, 2022
fix as the elastic#80945 do.

register a settings update consumer for the end_time for
the tsdb index even when the end_time setting wasn't registered.
Pass the feature flag to reindex yaml tests.

Co-authored-by: Igor Motov <[email protected]>
@pugnascotia pugnascotia added the >test Issues or PRs that are addressing/adding tests label Jan 31, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
auto-merge-without-approval Automatically merge pull request when CI checks pass (NB doesn't wait for reviews!) >bug external-contributor Pull request authored by a developer outside the Elasticsearch team :StorageEngine/TSDB You know, for Metrics Team:Analytics Meta label for analytical engine team (ESQL/Aggs/Geo) >test Issues or PRs that are addressing/adding tests v8.1.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants