On 30 May 2012, at 13:00, Dan Berindei wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Manik Surtani
<manik(a)jboss.org> wrote:
> I pretty much agree with this; and here's a bit of history.
>
> For the large part we have had a stable test suite, but the occasional
unpredictability in the suite came in when we introduced the parallel test runner, to
allow us to run the (core) suite in under 5 minutes - a suite which otherwise took over 2
hours when run sequentially.
>
> We could revert back to just using the sequential test runner if people prefer that -
it makes the suite run more predictably and hence easier to debug and maintain - but the
drawback is, well, it takes 2 hours to run.
>
> Perhaps we should use the parallel suite as a "smoke test", but in the
event of any failures, revert to a run using the sequential suite?
>
-1, a smoke test should be something that is not only faster but
always passes, so we could run that on each pull req. Getting a FAIL
from buildhive on each pull request would get tiring real quick.
Agreed. I know I have asked for this before, could we please try one more time, to
identify *all* tests that are known to periodically fail? I know the parallel suite
doesn't affect *all* tests in the same way.
--
Manik Surtani
manik(a)jboss.org
twitter.com/maniksurtani
Lead, Infinispan
http://www.infinispan.org