On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 08:30:49 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas J. Koenig) wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 07:27:55 +0100, "Rafael Garcia-Suarez" <[EMAIL > >>>>> PROTECTED]> said: > > >> (Why do I care? Because I get every other week a report of Time::HiRes > >> failing, that's why.) > > > Yes, and other core tests are sensitive to load (stress tests for > > threads, Benchmark.pm, ...). So that would be useful. But since that > > probably needs to be discussed at the TAP level, please followup-to > > perl-qa. > > Why is nobody adjusting the time expectations? > > When I build perl with threads support I run into test failure far too > often. Maybe there is really a bug? This is not only a TAP issue, it > must be decided about better values for what the thresholds expected > by the tests should be. To me it seems they are wrong. They are an ongoing issue of debate. If you change the timing to match expectations on a brand new 16 CPU fast Linux machine with lots of fast memory, be sure to break the tests on slow small configured old single CPU Solaris, HP-UX, or AIX machines. It might be more realistic to build in some set_delay () function that sets a basic timing delay in advance, that can be used throughout the rest of the tests, so all tests use the same relative delay. That was just a brain fart, shoot .... -- H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/) using & porting perl 5.6.2, 5.8.x, 5.10.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11, & 11.23, SuSE 10.1 & 10.2, AIX 5.2, and Cygwin. http://qa.perl.org http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
