Description Pascal Rapicault 2009-05-20 11:56:31 EDT

The fix for bug #276133 introduced an intermittent failure of test MissingOptionalWithDependencies3.
Daniel explains the intermittent failure in the following way

Here is the explanation why some of us pass the test an others do not.

There are too equally good solutions according to the optimization function
(with a value of -7):

Abs_B 1.0.0,A 1.0.0,D 1.0.0,C 2.0.0,Noop_D 1.0.0,1242834377753
0.0.0.1242834377753

B 1.0.0,A 1.0.0,Noop_B 1.0.0,D 1.0.0,Abs_D 1.0.0,C 2.0.0,1242834377753
0.0.0.1242834377753

It is important to note that the rewards are given on Abs_X variables and
penalties are given on Noop_X variables.

Since the two solutions have the same number of Abs_ variables and Noop_X
variables, they are equivalent to the solver.

The one that comes first depend on the order in which the constraints are
entered in the solver.

Since the order of the IUs depends basically on their address in memory, you
can understand that such order might change depending on the VM or the