[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#74394] [PATCH 0/2] Skip slow tests by default and run 'check' in Gi
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
[bug#74394] [PATCH 0/2] Skip slow tests by default and run 'check' in Git pre-push hook. |
Date: |
Tue, 17 Dec 2024 15:51:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Hi Maxim,
Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
[...]
>> I agree with the goal, of course, but not with the method: even without
>> expensive tests, “make check” is going to take maybe 5–10 minutes, and
>> having that happen when you run “git push” can be a terrible development
>> experience (especially since the developer most likely either already
>> ran the test suite or part of it right before, or pushes package changes
>> that have infinitely small probability of breaking “make check”).
>
> As I wrote, 'make check' with this change takes about 1 minute on my
> machine;
Right now, without your patch, we have:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ wget -qO- $(guix build --log-file guix --no-grafts)|gunzip |grep "\`check'"
starting phase `check'
phase `check' succeeded after 2049.2 seconds
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
More than 30mn on the fast machines of the build farm, and with some of
the expensive tests already skipped (those that require network access:
time-machine, pack -RR, etc.).
This patch is not dividing wall-clock time by 30, is it?
>> This variable itself may still be useful though (I’d call it
>> ‘RUN_EXPENSIVE_TESTS’ or something like that—that’s the name used in
>> Coreutils—, “expensive” being the key word). I would also keep it on by
>> default.
>
> One of the tests that was unbearably long when I measured was the
> time-machine test. It took about 20 minutes to fetch the git repository
> with guile-git and run the test (which does extra work compared to the
> CLI like validating each object). I don't think we want this kind of
> experience by default (because that'd probably convince people that
> running the test suite often is not a reasonable thing to do). The
> other tests were more reasonable, with the longer ones in the 2-3
> minutes range on my machine, IIRC. Perhaps we could have this 20 minute
> outlier skipped by default, maybe with a RUN_PROHIBITIVE_TESTS flag that
> would default to 0 (false).
Yeah okay, maybe we should skip them by default, and maybe we can find a
way to ensure developers do run them periodically.
> A long time ago I had read a blog post that argued that unit tests
> should be small and fast [0],
I actually agree. :-)
Thanks!
Ludo’.