db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Francois Orsini" <francois.ors...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: How to test StorageFactory/StorageFile implementations: help needed
Date Fri, 30 Mar 2007 00:11:36 GMT
Luigi,

On 3/29/07, Francois Orsini <francois.orsini@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Regarding A) You might want to look at some of the proposed and pending
> changes for in-memory database / storage support:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-646
>
> Check the very first comments as a possible way.


You would probably need to change some of the tests properties to use a
different default URL instead (if going the way it is mentioned in JIRA-646
and specify the storage factory to use)...

Btw, you might want to create a new JIRA entry (if none already exists) for
> this new storage factory implementation. Just my 0.02 cents,


Saw that you're working on
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2469;-)  forget the above

Regarding B) I guess you could also run the 'multi' (stress) test suite on
> top of storeall
>
> HTH
>
> On 3/29/07, Luigi Lauro <luigi.lauro@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > By checking the README.htm provided in the SVN testing directory, I
> > can see there is a "storeall" testing suite which seems to test the
> > storage area.
> >
> > Now, given I'm working on a new StorageFactory implementation, I
> > would like to know 2 things:
> >
> > A) How can I enable my storageFactory as default for testing? How can
> > I tell derby to use mine JNLPStorageFactory instead of default one?
> >
> > B) How much can I trust these tests? How much do they stress the
> > StorageFile/StorageFactory implementations? They are 'large enough'
> > so that I can safely trust an implementation if all storeall is
> > passed, or Do i need to provide more, specific test-case in order to
> > be safe of my StorageFactory/StorageFile implementation?
> >
> > Thanks a lot for any help you may give :)
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message