Is it unrealistic of me to expect that it should be possible to validate the behavior of the LINQ provider with perhaps 2-3 rows of data for each narrowly-targeted testcase rather than requiring such massive amounts of test data?
And even if more are needed, its hard for me to believe that 5-10 rows per test scenario (rather than the *thousands* mentioned here) wouldn't be sufficient for all but the most complex test scenarios. Is this an unrealistic expectation (and if so, can someone help me understand why this is a gross over-simplification of what's really needed)? I may be misunderstanding this but it almost sounds like we're building a perf-test suite for the LINQ provider rather than validation for it's correctness ;) Am I just being obtuse here (entirely possible <g>) --? -Steve B. -----Original Message----- From: Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:58:26 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: [nhibernate-development] Re: My feeling of our Tests If you are experimenting the sensation that our tests are again more slow than before is just because, for NH2583, we have some tests method (note * test-method*) storing *4608* entities (yes! that is not a mistake they are really 4608). some others "just" *1008*. I have reduced the time to run those test from +2 minutes to less than 1 minute in my machine... we done the possible and the impossible, for miracles I don't have more time to spend there. If you have a little bit of time, try to reduce the amount of entities needed to run a test to check the LINQ behavior. Thanks. On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > There are 2 areas where I hope I will never see a broken test (until > yesterday was one): > The first area was NHibernate.Test.Legacy but now it is the second on the > ranking. > The first one is now NHibernate.Test.NHSpecificTest.NH2583 > > God save the Queen!! > > -- > Fabio Maulo > > -- Fabio Maulo
