Hi Gianny,
I have submitted the fix for this issue with timeout
value of 1500 secs, sleep of 700 msecs and 1500 msecs
as mentioned in Jira and the tests passed. Making it
lower then that makes the test unstable atleast on my
machine, and some other machines that I am using.
I have attached the fi
> -Original Message-
> > From: Dain Sundstrom
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 8:04 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-553)
> Security Timeout Test
> > failures
> >
> > Can
age-
> From: Dain Sundstrom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 8:04 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [jira] Commented: (GERONIMO-553) Security Timeout Test
> failures
>
> Can this test be rewritten using wait/notify or a phantom reference?
&
I don't think so. But guess Alan might be able to give
you proper answer.
Cheers,
Sandip
--- Dain Sundstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can this test be rewritten using wait/notify or a
> phantom reference?
>
> -dain
>
> --
> Dain Sundstrom
> Chief Architect
> Gluecode Software
> 310.536.8355
Can this test be rewritten using wait/notify or a phantom reference?
-dain
--
Dain Sundstrom
Chief Architect
Gluecode Software
310.536.8355, ext. 26
On Jan 27, 2005, at 9:24 AM, Sandip Ghayal wrote:
Well we are not doing anything much
Just sleeping for 3 second and then sleeping for 7
seconds.
Ok I
Well we are not doing anything much
Just sleeping for 3 second and then sleeping for 7
seconds.
Ok I have experimented with new values.
Scan time of 100 ms
Timeout value: 2000 ms
Sleep 1: 1000 ms
Sleep 2: 3000 ms
Total test time 6.86 sec
I think this should be acceptable.
Sorry Alan, don't w
I have to ask - what are we doing that means we need to make the
timeouts so long? Is there some intrinsically long running operation
here or are things just inefficient?
I ask 'cos a 15 second test is going to get Alan yelled at again :-)
--
Jeremy
Sandip Ghayal wrote:
Hi Alan,
Increasing timeo
Hi Alan,
Increasing timeout scan did not make any difference.
It is one second timeout value that is causing test to
fail.(though I do agree timeout scan of 50ms will be
hard on slow computers, which we can increase)
I do feel that timeouts should be in terms of couple
of seconds and not just 1 s
