Fabio - I don't need 4K entries - but what I tried to say is that "I" (we?) need full input coverage for critical functions *or* a reliable method that reduces the input (not some guesswork like "pair-wise coverage" or even manually selecting "just a few records" or the like). I want to pay *all* attention to the runtime of tests! - it just did not occur to me - or Patrick, as far as I know. We'll try to find a solution - maybe there's a simple one! Anyone has suggestions?!? It might, however, take "a little" - a few days ok?
Regards Harald -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:31:46 -0300 > Von: Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> > An: "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: [nhibernate-development] Re: My feeling of our Tests > Harald, > I know that this is part of the cost/gain but please say me that you > really need 4K rows to test somethig in a method. > btw, I have reduced the time-to-run of those tests and I realy hope > I'll never see somethig broken there; what I'm asking is to try to pay > a bit of attention to check if we really need all those rows in the DB > and some comment here and there (in the test) to understand the > scenario tested by a method. > > Herald, the time to run all NH's tests, for me, is important (if you > have a look to the SVN log I'm sure you will understand). > > -- > Fabio Maulo > > P.S. I have changed the logic of the SQL generated for > binary-equality, when you have time please have a look to the result, > thanks. > > -- NEU: FreePhone - kostenlos mobil telefonieren und surfen! Jetzt informieren: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/freephone
