Branko Čibej wrote on Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 18:37:24 +0100:
> On 23.11.2016 13:31, Evgeny Kotkov wrote:
> > Branko Čibej <brane_at_apache.org> writes:
> >
> >> New issues:
> >>
> >> - fs-test 65 fails with SQLite 3.8.10.2:
> >> [[[
> >> svn_tests: E200006: Expected error SVN_ERR_SQLITE_BUSY but got
> >> SVN_ERR_SQLITE_ERROR
> >> svn_tests: E200030: sqlite[S10]: disk I/O error
> >> svn_tests: E200042: Additional errors:
> >> svn_tests: E200030: sqlite[S10]: disk I/O error
> >> svn_tests: E200044: SQLite transaction rollback failed
> >> svn_tests: E200030: sqlite[S1]: cannot rollback - no transaction is active
> >> svn_tests: E200030: sqlite[S1]: cannot rollback - no transaction is active
> >> FAIL: fs-test 65: test commit with locked rep-cache
> >> ]]]
> > Hi Branko,
> >
> > Is this failure reproducible? Does it happen if you run just fs-test#65?
> >
> > I tried to witness the failure on my Windows and Linux machines with
> > SQLite 3.8.10.2, but the test passes for me (the relevant sqlite-test#2
> > also works fine).
>
> It is reproducible whether run as a single test, all of fs-test or the
> whole test suite; but only with SQLite 3.8.10.2. I suspect it is a test
> bug, but haven't followed up; could be due to a bug in SQLite itself,
> e.g., that the older version returns the wrong error code.
>
> The only potential problem as far as I can see is that 3.8.10.2 is the
> version of SQLite shipped with OSX — hence, the version that most
> binaries will be linking with.
Does the test pass if you patch it to expect SVN_ERR_SQLITE_ERROR? Once
the shared lock is released, do subsequent commits operate normally
(finish timely and update rep-cache.db)?
I.e., does this failure mode have any impact beyond the wrong
apr_status_t value being returned by svn_fs_commit_txn()?
Cheers,
Daniel
Received on 2016-11-23 18:55:22 CET