test: improve test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race by Trott · Pull Request #4739 · nodejs/node
Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. Ref: nodejs#4674 cc @santigimeno @iwuzhere
Trott added a commit that referenced this pull request
Jan 19, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: #4739 Ref: #4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Trott
mentioned this pull request
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request
Jan 20, 2016Two cluster tests have recently changed so that they are no longer resource intensive. Move them back to parallel. Ref: nodejs#4736 Ref: nodejs#4739
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request
Jan 21, 2016Two cluster tests have recently changed so that they are no longer resource intensive. Move them back to parallel. Ref: nodejs#4736 Ref: nodejs#4739 PR-URL: nodejs#4774 Reviewed-By: Johan Bergström <bugs@bergstroem.nu> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
rvagg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Jan 25, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: #4739 Ref: #4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
rvagg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Jan 25, 2016MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Jan 28, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: #4739 Ref: #4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
rvagg
mentioned this pull request
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Feb 11, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: #4739 Ref: #4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit to MylesBorins/node that referenced this pull request
Feb 11, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: nodejs#4739 Ref: nodejs#4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit to MylesBorins/node that referenced this pull request
Feb 13, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: nodejs#4739 Ref: nodejs#4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit to MylesBorins/node that referenced this pull request
Feb 15, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: nodejs#4739 Ref: nodejs#4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Mar 17, 2016MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request
Mar 21, 2016scovetta pushed a commit to scovetta/node that referenced this pull request
Apr 2, 2016Previously, test-cluster-disconnect-suicide-race had two issues: * Magic numbers: How many times to spawn a worker was determined through empirical experimentation. This means that as new platforms and new CPU/RAM configurations are tested, the magic numbers require more and more refinement. This brings us to... * Non-determinism: The test seems to fail all the time when the bug it tests for is present, but it's really a judgment based on sampling. "Oh, with 8 workers per CPU, it fails about 80% of the time. Let's try 16..." This revised version of the test takes a different approach. The fix for the bug that the test was written for means that the disconnect event will fire on a subsequent tick. So we check for that and the test still fails when the fix is not in the code base and succeeds when it is. Advantages of this approach include: * The test runs much faster. * The test should be reliable on any new platform regardless of CPU and RAM. PR-URL: nodejs#4739 Ref: nodejs#4674 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
scovetta pushed a commit to scovetta/node that referenced this pull request
Apr 2, 2016Two cluster tests have recently changed so that they are no longer resource intensive. Move them back to parallel. Ref: nodejs#4736 Ref: nodejs#4739 PR-URL: nodejs#4774 Reviewed-By: Johan Bergström <bugs@bergstroem.nu> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Trott
deleted the
improve-race-test
branch
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters