These appear to fail due to "missing" there intended target - result is:
Results for FeatureType 'http://www.opengis.net/cite:custom':
--------------------------------------------
PALETTE_INDEX = 2.0
--------------------------------------------
This is odd as the test is trying to keep things in the native projection,
which I assume would be less prone to differences due to reprojection.
// force it to "keep native"
CoverageInfo ci = getCatalog().getCoverageByName(getLayerId(CUSTOM));
ci.setProjectionPolicy(ProjectionPolicy.NONE);
getCatalog().save(ci);
--
Jody Garnett
On 30 April 2015 at 11:58, Jody Garnett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Later:
>
> testRasterKeepNative(org.geoserver.wms.wms_1_1_1.GetFeatureInfoTest) Time
> elapsed: 28 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError
> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:86)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:52)
> at
> org.geoserver.wms.wms_1_1_1.GetFeatureInfoTest.testRasterKeepNative(GetFeatureInfoTest.java:816
>
> And again:
>
> testRasterKeepNative(org.geoserver.wms.featureinfo.GetFeatureInfoJSONTest)
> Time elapsed: 41 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError
> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:86)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:41)
> at org.junit.Assert.assertTrue(Assert.java:52)
> at
> org.geoserver.wms.wms_1_1_1.GetFeatureInfoTest.testRasterKeepNative(GetFeatureInfoTest.java:816)
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 30 April 2015 at 11:50, Jody Garnett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Trying out GeoServer without vecmath (the geotools "matrix" branch). I
>> expect quite a few test cases to change based on difference matrix
>> implementation. I had two tests change in GeoTools:
>> a) one based on different invert() results, needed to adjust tolerances
>> to recognize result as an Identity matrix after calculation involving
>> matrix. So very subtle differences in inverse() output - not sure which
>> implementation was more accurate.
>> b) one based on transforming WMS lat/lon bounds to native bounds
>> resulting in slightly different output. The transformation chain was epic
>> so I am not surprised at the slight difference near the poles. It is this
>> difference that has me expecting changes at the GeoServer level.
>>
>> So far all I have noticed is the pom.xml references OpenPlans still,
>> changing that to OSGeo :)
>>
>> I will report back later.
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
