-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 207
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
Test master #3094
Test master #3094
Conversation
README.md
Outdated
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ For information on using the package, | |||
[in-development documentation](https://docs.sciml.ai/ModelingToolkit/dev/) for the version of | |||
the documentation which contains the unreleased features. | |||
|
|||
|
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.
[JuliaFormatter] reported by reviewdog 🐶
@AayushSabharwal is this what you were talking about the other day? https://github.com/SciML/ModelingToolkit.jl/actions/runs/11193882959/job/31119719069?pr=3094#step:6:1125 |
It broke from the 3rd to the 1st commit between Sept. 27-28, where only DiffEqCallbacks was bumped to v4. Reverting to DiffEqCallbacks v3 does not fix it on my machine, so I think the cause is external. |
Yes
That test call fails because it uses the tstops from the previous solve, which also fails. |
SciML/DiffEqBase.jl@f870554 breaks the test. |
Really? That's related???? |
Just decrease the tolerance, that's effectively random. |
Yeah, it seems very sensitive to the tolerance. I just did checkout on some commits until this hit. |
using Printf
for pow in range(-10, -3)
for fac in range(1, 9)
reltol = fac * 10.0^pow
sol1 = solve(prob, RosShamp4(); reltol)
@printf "reltol = %.1E -> %s\n" reltol sol1.retcode
end
end
|
I picked a tolerance from @hersle 's table above at the beginning of what looks like a relatively stable region |
Huh, that passed locally |
So far no luck in replicating any of the failures in |
I got the feeling the test is not robust regardless, considering how SciML/DiffEqBase.jl@f870554 breaks it. Maybe even machine-dependent floating point operations etc. play a role. |
That's possible, but how is it getting differently sized arrays given the tstops of the previous solve? |
Hmm, there's this warning:
right before the failure. Maybe the first solve is failing on CI? |
I think that's what causes it. |
I also fixed a failure in InterfaceII's dde tests, but it's failing differently now and is also not reproducing locally. This is really weird behavior EDIT: Okay never mind I guess |
No description provided.