On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 03:50:01PM +0400, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 6:40 PM, <s...@apache.org> wrote: >> > Author: stsp >> > Date: Fri Jun 14 14:40:17 2013 >> > New Revision: 1493097 >> > >> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1493097 >> > Log: >> > Run tests with an exclusive lock on working copies. This should reduce test >> > run time and also ensures that exclusive locking mode is tested. >> > >> > I've run ra_local and ra_serf tests with this change and got no failures. >> > In any case, if there were any test failures with exlusive locking mode >> > enabled, they'd most likely expose bugs in the test suite or Subversion >> > itself. >> > >> I don't like this change actually: >> 1. Running tests in different configuration than regular users are >> using bad practice > > I did think about this before making the change. > > Your argument can be turned around. If we never test the exclusive > locking mode, how can we be sure that it works? > Just make it optional and someone who interested in this particular configuration will use it for testing. Or configure dedicated buildbot for that.
> And consider that, if a test passes with exclusive locking, it very > likely passes with less restrictive locking. But the reverse is not true! > Tests could fail in exclusive locking mode due to bugs in the tests > or the code, and we would never see those failures until now. > No. It's just two different configuration and you cannot say that if it pass in one configuration it also doesn't have problems with another. >> 2. It also seems to broke svn benchmarks posted every week, because >> now we get totally different numbers for operations. > > That's unfortunate. But what about things like server-side caching? > Don't improvements in such areas have similar effects? I think having > better test coverage and test speed is more important than keeping > the benchmark results consistent over time. Server-side caching is default configuration. I'm just asking your keep running test suite in default configuration, which most (at least 80%) users are using. > >> Could you please make option to running test suite with exclusive >> locking mode and leave it 'off' by default. Thanks! > > I could do that, yes. But it multiples the number of test configurations > yet again, which I don't like. If we do this, I can switch my buildbot > to use exclusive locks. And if the buildbot fails some day or we stop > maintaining the bot, test coverage will get worse again because nobody > tests exclusive mode anymore. So I'd rather have the default be 'on'. Multiple tests configurations is great because every person/build can right tests for different configuration. But default should be the same as default Subversion configuration. -- Ivan Zhakov CTO | VisualSVN | http://www.visualsvn.com
