Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity. On Nov 14, 2013 4:46 PM, "Josh Elser" <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11/14/13, 2:41 PM, John Vines wrote: >> >> Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity. >> On Nov 14, 2013 2:49 PM, "Josh Elser" <josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Been bitten by goofy/half-implemented stuff in Mock too many times. I'd >> >> rather see effort placed into making MAC a reliable and fast testing >> mechanism than helping Mock limp along >> >> -1 >> >> MAC isn't there yet and I don't think we should deprecate it without a >> suitable alternative in place > > > Can you provide why you think "MAC isn't there yet" and what you would consider the bar for "suitable alternative" please?
Faster to use, easier to use in junit tests, and easier to debug iterators in an ide. Specifically, the spin up time of mock vs Mac is orders of magnitude. Because of that, junit tests should reuse a mock, which I think the maven plugin should help with, but I don't know how well it works and what the effect is on in IDE testing. Lastly, because tservers spin up in new processes, it makes it overwhelmingly difficult to debug an iterator stack. Either mechanisms to improve debug hooks for the processes or an alternative iterator testing suite is in order. > > >>> >>> >>> On 11/14/13, 12:41 PM, Keith Turner wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Should we deprecate mock accumulo for 1.6.0? This was considered [1] for >>>> 1.5.0. I started thinking about this because I never added conditional >>>> writer to mock. >>>> >>>> [1] : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-878 >>>> >>
