Eugene, A stress test is intended to verify that the system works correctly upto the the max limits supported by the design. In this case ~ 8MB of vtable space which is large enough for > 30000 classes. Any stress test can be constructed to go beyond any design constraint, it does not give us much new information. I think that it makes sense to leave it as a failing test. We can rethink if we need to support more in the next milestone, and what's the best way to do it. A good way would be to investigate if an Eclipse type scenario can be found that actually loads more than 34000 classes. Thanks, Rana On Dec 16, 2007 10:39 AM, Eugene Ostrovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with Mikhail and Tim. > Stress tests are intended to make stress. A stress test that was > simplified to make him pass is useless. > > Xiao-Feng Li wrote: > > I guess it should be easy to have a resizable pool for Vtables by > preserving bigger address space for it. > > What do you mean by 'preserving'? > If we preallocate memory for a pool it can't be called 'resizable' > IMHO even if it is really huge. > > How much do you propose to increase the pool? 2 times? 10 times? > > Thanks, > Eugene. > > On Dec 15, 2007 2:56 PM, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Mikhail Loenko wrote: > > > I'm against simplifying tests to make them passing. > > > Tests are for catching bugs and failing tests indicate that a problem > does exist > > > > Yep, no need to make the test 'artificially' pass. If it is a good test > > then leave it as a failing test so we know what to fix. > > > > Regards, > > Tim >
