Thank you Adrian, and of course there is no rush at all. Jacopo
On Apr 30, 2012, at 1:45 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: > I will give it a try, but it will have to wait until tomorrow. > > -Adrian > > On 4/30/2012 12:42 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >> If, as Adam mentioned, it is an issue caused by the time-slice in your box, >> then setting a greater timeout may fix the issue... if you will be able to >> make it work with, let's say 600 ms (or even 1s) then I would like to commit >> the change to make the test a bit more robust (even if it will be slower). >> >> Jacopo >> >> On Apr 30, 2012, at 12:17 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >> >>> On 4/30/2012 10:27 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>> On Apr 23, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: >>>> >>>>> I tried experimenting with the sleep timing and I also replaced the >>>>> Thread.sleep call with a safer version, but the tests still failed. >>>> interesting... but if you change the Thread.sleep timeout from 200 to 2000 >>>> it works, right? >>> I changed it to 300. By the way, the test finally passed for the first time >>> when I had another non-OFBiz process running at the same time that was >>> making heavy use of the hard disk. >>> >>> -Adrian >>>
