stefan-egli commented on PR #962:
URL: https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/pull/962#issuecomment-1580516008

   > I added more tests with 
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/commit/2676bd6a693ec05bc89d46059f6b921021393b50.
 Do you have more tests in mind I could add?
   
   Mostly I think it would be some more loop tests (a -> b -> c -> a, or a -> 
b/c -> d/e/f -> a etc), or variations of where the commit is done, but couldn't 
come up with one that would expose a neo bug right away ..
   
   > I'm not too concerned about performance
   
   I agree, plus neo should anyway be faster than classic for very large moves 
when including memory effects..
   
   > It is certainly possible to create such a test, but I don't see why this 
would be useful.
   
   ok, was just thinking of reproducing the original issue - but it might be a 
bit overkill indeed ...
   
   > I was considering running all tests with classic and neo move, but then 
concluded cost outweighs benefits by far. The classic implementation was tested 
thoroughly so far whenever a test or application code did a move. I therefore 
decided to enable the new implementation by default and add more test coverage 
specifically for the classic implementation to get full test coverage even if 
it is not enabled by default anymore.
   
   What I noticed is that there are now two separate tests, ClassicMoveTest and 
MoveTest - the former on ClassicMove, the latter on NeoMove. What about 
combining those and running it against classic _and_ neo (eg via a rule)?
   
   I gave it a quick try and interesting enough `MoveTest.moveMoved` does fail 
on `ClassicMove` (at [this 
line](https://github.com/mreutegg/jackrabbit-oak/blob/4e6861de0f9e78585f409946728d625688f96f1e/oak-core/src/test/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/core/MoveTest.java#L110)
  ) - a potential bug in the old code that NeoMove now fixes as a side-effect?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to