Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

I would be hesitant to start categorizing tests by name (again) as we'd be introducing a different (non consistent) qualifier which is only relevant to one class of tests. All AcceptanceTests should already be grouped in the geode-assembly module so running them with geode-assembly:acceptanceTest

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

How about a sub module that only contains acceptance tests? > On Apr 4, 2018, at 4:42 PM, Kirk Lund wrote: > > Nick made the changes necessary to open up AcceptanceTest to other Geode > submodules and it takes too long. The cause is what Jared mentioned. > Basically, Gradle

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

Nick made the changes necessary to open up AcceptanceTest to other Geode submodules and it takes too long. The cause is what Jared mentioned. Basically, Gradle forks a new JVM for every *Test in our code base and then executes JUnit which queries the test class for Category and either runs or

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

Just FYI, the reason that :acceptanceTest is currently only a target of precheckin is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-3296 For the full details, see this thread on the Gradle Forums: https://discuss.gradle.org/t/test-task-with-forkevery-1-and-includecategories-performs-poorly/23401

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

+1. AcceptanceTest seems fittings, although... That test category was created with the focus on tests that run gfsh scripts via the GfshRule. Because the GfshRule uses the built jar and actually launches gfsh to run its tests, all current AcceptanceTests exist in geode-assembly. Perhaps as an

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

+1 to using AcceptanceTest category for the end-to-end JDBC connector service tests On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Nick Reich wrote: > Using AcceptanceTest category seems like a good solution at the moment to > me. > > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Sean Goller

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

Using AcceptanceTest category seems like a good solution at the moment to me. On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 4:29 PM, Sean Goller wrote: > I'm actually fine with putting it in AcceptanceTest for now. > > Ideally I'd like to see something like JDBC connection strings that could > be

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

I'm actually fine with putting it in AcceptanceTest for now. Ideally I'd like to see something like JDBC connection strings that could be passed in as properties via the command-line, and if they're not present the relevant tests don't get run. That way the entity running the tests can decide the

Re: [DISCUSS]: Tests requiring external services

I'm in favor of using docker for test isolation. We already have an 'AcceptanceTest' category which you might consider using instead of creating yet another category. --Jens On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 2:02 PM, Nick Reich wrote: > Team, > > As part of validating the new JDBC