If I enable *any* of the TestClusterDumper tests then all further tests are prevented from running. If I disable *all* of them, everything works fine.
I first suspected a call to System.exit(), but I don't see any. Will debug further. On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > The problem wasn't the time. It was that the tests stopped executing > without letting subsequent tests run. I will update and check it out. > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Jeff Eastman <jeast...@narus.com> wrote: > >> This pulled a couple minutes out of the build, but core is still the long >> pole in the tent, at 12m on my laptop. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeff Eastman [mailto:jeast...@narus.com] >> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 9:52 AM >> To: dev@mahout.apache.org >> Subject: RE: problems with util test cases >> >> One easy fix would be to use the sequential mode processing for the >> cluster dumper tests. Running in mapreduce mode the test takes 3 minutes on >> my laptop. With sequential mode it takes 2m10s, all but 22s doing SVD and >> DSVD computations (3 tests). With those 3 commented out it runs most >> quickly. I will commit that change now. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 9:16 AM >> To: dev@mahout.apache.org >> Subject: Re: problems with util test cases >> >> Yes. Makes huge sense to open a ticket. >> >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Christopher Jordan <cjor...@gilt.com >> >wrote: >> >> > Does it make sense to open a ticket to fix these test cases? I am likely >> > going to be poking at the cluster dumper next week and might be able to >> > help. >> > >> > On Apr 22, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> > >> > > I would love it. Especially since it doesn't check the results. >> > > >> > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 1:49 AM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> It takes about five minutes to run too, which is maybe 1/3 of the >> whole >> > >> test >> > >> time. Would anyone be offended if we made this a non-test test that >> > didn't >> > >> run by default? >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com >> > >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> No. That isn't the issue. Several of these tests run faster and >> when >> > >> run >> > >>> in isolation they don't seem to complete or fail. They stop >> executing, >> > >> but >> > >>> no succeeding tests run. >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >
