On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote: > On 6/3/11 8:27 AM, Kiran Ayyagari wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Alex Karasulu<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> This did not make it to the list. --Alex >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Alex Karasulu<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Is there any way we can avoid using timing dependent code like these >>>> sleep calls? Can't we enable a feedback mechanism where setting some >>>> variable drives controlling this process? >> >> this test like many other integration tests involves a running >> server(s) in network mode and the scenario under testing is highly >> time bound, i.e there >> *will* be delays before the data gets replicated and the test has to >> be written based on the reasonable time limit. >> Though not straight forward, feedback based mechanism can be added but >> that requires a lot of scaffolding based on persistent search/event >> listeners > > I also think that it is unfortunate, but basically replication tests are > tome based. > > However, we *must* make those tests independant from the functional tests, > otherwise we won't be able to do regression tests before committing.
Good idea. Maybe we should separate out test tests. > OpenLDAP have a separate part where they do replication tests (the very same > way : they are all time based). :( > We already shortly discussed with Kiran (well, discussing is a gross > exgeration, we had a short IM interaction last week as a test was failing) > and we agreed that we should define a specific profile (maven profile) to > run replication tests. > > IMO, this is the only possible path... > > thoughts ? +1 - I completely agree. Regards, Alex
