On 14.07.10 11:31, Knut Anders Hatlen wrote:
On 07/14/10 10:57 AM, Tiago Espinha wrote:
[ snip ]
I think the best and simplest way to solve this is to just bump up the limit to
what's required right now. Even if we require 11 or 12 ports that still allows
us, in theory, to have ~5000 parallel runs in the same machine, which would be
madness even in a top-of-the-line server.
Agreed. I don't think the issue here is that we use too many ports
(yet). It's just that it would be good if we didn't have to maintain a
max limit that developers may or may not discover that they need to
increase depending on how they ran the tests. This limit also has to be
maintained in the scripts the developers use to run the tests. So I
think it would be nice if we could somehow make the port allocation more
scalable, but I would be fine with just increasing the limit to, say, 20
for now.
I have committed a fix with increases the limit to 20 for now (see
DERBY-4700).
There seems to be more issues to address when it comes to ports in the
test framework, so we should follow up on that.
Regards,
--
Kristian
