David W. Van Couvering wrote:
My understanding it's the wall clock time.
derbyall 630 6 624 0 Duration 45.6%
OK. So it's saying that this particular run of 'derbyall' took 46.2% of the wall clock time that 'derbyall' took on August 2, 2005. That makes sense. Given that this particular run failed badly, we probably don't care about the Durations, then. But in general, we'd probably want to keep our eyes open for Duration values that started to get significantly higher than 100%, because that would mean that we might have accidentally introduced a performance regression. Perhaps we could have some sort of trigger, so that if a suite experienced a duration of, say, 150%, that was treated as a regression failure, even if all the tests in that suite passed? thanks, bryan
