accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <>
Subject Re: Integration Tests
Date Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:11:45 GMT
I think I like the idea of moving it to server and working towards MAC 
and the "regular" processes being equal citizens. Whether or not we make 
a convenient option to auto-start a proxy is more of a discussion about 
how easy we want to make startup for a new person.

As much as I think we need to get 1.5 out the door, I think this may be 
best to nip right away rather than create confusion about "where did MAC 
go!" immediately after 1.5.0 is released.

The server module seems like the most painless and correct home for 

On 4/28/13 1:45 AM, Christopher wrote:
> I agree that accumulo-test is the best place, but I think we should
> make it a point that no other modules should depend on accumulo-test
> for precisely this reason... to provide a place for end-to-end tests
> of other modules (the assembly module notwithstanding).
> This is actually a good reason to move MiniAccumuloCluster from test,
> because the proxy currently has a dependency on it just for
> MiniAccumuloCluster. That way, end-to-end integration testing that
> includes even testing of the proxy would make sense to exist in
> accumulo-test, and we'd avoid a circular dependency. It could be moved
> to server instead, as it seems to me that it is essentially an
> alternate server implementation (from the proxy's perspective,
> anyway). Though, I'm not sure I like the idea that the proxy is
> dependent on anything other than client code (accumulo-core).
> Alternatively, the proxy's dependency could be reversed, so that
> instead of the proxy having an option to start up a
> MiniAccumuloCluster, the MiniAccumuloCluster could have an option to
> start up the proxy. This reversal actually makes more sense to me
> anyway. I never understood why the proxy should have the option to
> start up Accumulo, Mini or otherwise, as the natural operation, as it
> seems to me to be a bit backwards: an interface launching the service,
> rather than a service exposing an interface. I suppose it's not
> unprecedented, but it seems backwards to me.
> A third option is to move MiniAccumuloCluster to another module
> entirely, but I'm not so sure that's necessary or desirable.
> Any of these options removes the circular dependency, if we're going
> to make the accumulo-test the place to put end-to-end integration
> tests.
> My preference is a combination of the first two options: to put
> MiniAccumuloCluster in the server module and reverse the dependency,
> so that proxy only depends on core, and none depend on test.
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Keith Turner <> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Corey Nolet <> wrote:
>>> So the accumulo-test would be the best place to start putting end to end
>>> integration tests?
>> For test against code in modules that can not depend on accumulo-test I
>> think this is a good place.
>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone
>>> -------- Original message --------
>>> From: Christopher <>
>>> Date: 04/26/2013  7:27 AM  (GMT-05:00)
>>> To: Accumulo Dev List <>
>>> Subject: Re: Integration Tests
>>> The maven-failsafe-plugin is already configured to execute integration
>>> tests in the 1.5 branch and trunk. Simply name your JUnit classes to
>>> execute with the pattern of "*IT" (vs. "*Test" for unit tests), and
>>> they'll execute during the integration test phase of the build
>>> lifecycle. That way, they won't slow down a "mvn package" build, but
>>> they'll still get executed for a full build "mvn verify".
>>> --
>>> Christopher L Tubbs II
>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Corey Nolet <> wrote:
>>>> Would it make sense to start putting more integration tests for tablet
>>> servers, master, connector, etc… inside of the accumulo-test module (or
>>> some other module)? Seems like it'd be useful to have tests at the various
>>> layers. Until we have a plugin to start up the mini acc cluster once and
>>> only once, I don't want to drastically slow down the build. I would,
>>> however, like to have some integration tests for a current ticket I'm
>>> working on.

View raw message