I see. So -Dtests.dups=100 -Dtests.method=testXYZ (no glob) -Dtests.jvms=1 would run 100 repetitions of testXYZ on 1 JVM, only that way I don't need to specify a glob?
Why do we have -Dtests.iters then? Why not just stick w/ dups and document that you can restrict the number of JVMs if you want? Shai On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: > You can use tests.jvms=1 to force only 1 JVM.**** > > ** ** > > -----**** > > Uwe Schindler**** > > H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen**** > > http://www.thetaphi.de**** > > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Shai Erera [mailto:ser...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Sunday, December 09, 2012 11:04 AM > *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Question on -Dtests.iters needing the glob**** > > ** ** > > Doron just told me that I can use -Dtests.dups, which is great since it > supports no-globbing and runs tests in parallel on multiple JVMs (4 on my > laptop). > > While this is great, it'd still be good if tests.iters supported no > globbing implicitly. Because it doesn't help to run tests that are > concurrent already, on multiple JVMs :). Now more threads compete on CPU > resources. > > Shai**** > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Shai Erera <ser...@gmail.com> wrote:**** > > Hi > > Can the randomizing test framework add the glob implicitly, if a > -Dtests.method is defined together with -Dtests.iters? > I don't mind adding the glob, but it'd be much nicer and easier if the > framework did it. Like, it could just check that the specific test method > invocation startsWith tests.method? > > The reason I'm asking is because when I run a single test method from > eclipse and add -Dtests.iters, it doesn't work. > And I always forget that you cannot run them like that. You have to run > the entire test-class, and add the tests.method filter. > But then I forget to remove the filter when I actually want to test the > entire class ... or if I do remember that, I need to create > several run configurations with names ... > > This is just a convenience. If JUnit doesn't allow that, I'll live without > it. > > Shai**** > > ** ** >
