hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Meil <doug.m...@explorysmedical.com>
Subject Re: unit tests improvement
Date Thu, 03 Nov 2011 18:47:48 GMT

I'll put together a book patch and have you guys comment on it before it
goes in.




On 11/3/11 12:56 PM, "Jesse Yates" <jesse.k.yates@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:53 AM, N Keywal <nkeywal@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > > 2) HBASE-4737 is for the split; as discussed two weeks ago. There
>>is a
>> > > split proposal. I will apply this split this week-end or monday,
>>don't
>> > > hesitate to provide a feedback before (or after if necessary :-). I
>> > tested
>> > > the parallelization within surefire for the small tests, it seems to
>> work
>> > > quite well.
>> > >
>> > > Don't forget that the idea is to run only small & medium on the
>> developer
>> > > machine by default. This will make the sub-tests-suite runs under 30
>> > > minutes, but the selection is important if we don't want to kill the
>> > > pre-patch machine with defects that could have been detected before.
>> > >
>> >
>> > You thinking patch-build should not run the full suite?
>> >
>> >
>> I was thinking about the hbase-book, chapter "13.7 submitting patch".
>>Today
>> it says; " Make sure unit tests pass locally before submitting the
>>patch.".
>> It could become something as: "Make sure unit tests pass locally before
>> submitting the patch. For large or risky patches, run as well the
>> integration/large tests suite before submitting".
>>
>
>+1
>
>We might want to qualify 'large' as spanning X classes (4+?) so people
>have
>something to go by. However, this doesn't need to be a hard and fast rule
>as jenkins should be running the entire suite.
>
>-- 
>-------------------
>Jesse Yates
>240-888-2200
>@jesse_yates



Mime
View raw message