Emmanuel,

On 3/27/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Alex Karasulu a écrit :

> Just watch out for tests that may colide.  For example some tests will
> add
> stuff into the server then count and assert the number of entries.  Some
> tests will delete entries.  All these tests presume a pristine setup
> with a
> fresh server.  So basically we're going to need to cleanup for each
test.

That's true. I have looked at this method, but when I saw the
implications, I just step back.


Man I don't blame you :).



>
> Some tests presume custom setups.  So this is not such a clean and
simple
> approach with what we have.  Although there the techique will work it
> will
> take some labor to get us there.

We nned something a little bit different. Most of the tests we have
should use this kind of process :
1) initialize data
2) do the test
3) restore the initial state.


Exactly this would work effectively restoring the initial state without
requiring the stop, cleanup, and restart process.



For instance, if we want to test a DelRequest, the step (1) would simply
inject the data, then (2) will remove it, and (3) will be empty.
Pierre-Arnaud is worling on such tests that use DSML, because you can
write them in one single file containing the AddRequest, the
RemoveRequest and the SearchRequest to be sure we don't have the removed
entry anymore.

Wait and see :)


Hey this would be a slick replay feature for something like LS btw.  I know
that's OT on this thread but it's a cool thought.

Alex

Reply via email to