I'm not 100% clear on your proposal. First of all, is what I've done (on RB) in the meantime okay (without a ticket)? Basically, I renamed ItemsListSpecs to MapperSpecs2 and put the test for issue 370 there. MapperSpecs2 only uses H2 memory db. (Any suggestions for a better name?) As for your proposal, are you saying that things like ItemsListSpecs and 370, which deal with high-level Mapper API not directly related to the database, should ideally be testable on every database vendor? And/or are you saying that *all* the tests should be run by default on only one driver but have the option to run on all? Also, is it possible to run MapperSpecs for all the drivers in parallel, and if so would that cause it to finish faster?
Thanks. ------------------------------------- David Pollak<feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote: > Based on discussion on Review Board item 247, I want to propose the > following change to the organization of Mapper specs. > Currently there are four files in > framework/lift-persistence/lift-mapper/src/test/scala/net/liftweb/mapper: > DBProviders - initalization for each provider to be tested > MapperSpecs - the original set of tests. Tested per provider, which makes > sense for tests that interact with the database > ManyToManySpecs - tests I added with an enhancement to ManyToMany to not > choke on broken joins. Only uses DBProviders.H2MemoryProvider. When FK > constraints are enabled in H2 this will have to disable them. > ItemsListSpecs - tests for a bugfix in ItemsList. Also only uses > DBProviders.H2MemoryProvider. > > Currently MapperSpecs takes about five minutes to run on my laptop. So any > new test that isn't driver dependent should probably not be tested on all > drivers. Thus I'm considering consolidating ItemsListSpecs and > ManyToManySpecs into one specs for all H2MemoryProvider-only tests. > Then, with two set of tests, one run for each driver and one not, maybe > their names should reflect that. > It's just a possible idea, but what do people think? Also, if I would go > ahead would it need a ticket or just straight to RB? > I agree with the goal of shortening the time it takes to run mapper tests. I would like there to be a way (not the default, but something that can be done with some form of compiler/maven flags) to run all cross-products of all tests so we just make 100% sure that things work on all RDBMSs. Please open a ticket first before putting stuff on RB. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Lift" group. > To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<liftweb%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. > > -- Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Surf the harmonics -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
