- From: Stefan Radomski <radomski@tk.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 15:09:22 +0000
- To: Jim Barnett <jim.barnett@genesys.com>
- CC: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>, "www-voice@w3.org (www-voice@w3.org)" <www-voice@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <21A74AA6-8BBD-4741-84C4-C218DC96FA18@tk.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Can’t you keep the relative delay values and introduce a factor by which implementations can multiply these? This way, the performant implementations can set the factor small and others keep it at 1 or even bigger. If it’s too much of a hassle, just keep it as it is and I will live with a 1 minute delay every time the tests run. Stefan On Jun 28, 2014, at 16:10, Jim Barnett <jim.barnett@genesys.com<mailto:jim.barnett@genesys.com>> wrote: One problem that occurs to me is that we may want different timeout values for different tests (some tests involve <invoke>, which is going to be slower than other operations). So setting a single value for conf:delay may not work well. We could just say that platforms can adjust the timeout values to suit their conditions, but that requires a lot of editing for each platform. Would it be acceptable for each platform to set conf:delay to the largest timeout value it would ever need? - Jim From: Jim Barnett [mailto:1jhbarnett@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2014 8:35 AM To: www-voice@w3.org<mailto:www-voice@w3.org> Subject: Re: Make SCXML IRP tests more CI-able I wanted to make sure that the timeout didn't fire too soon since that would cause the test to fail when it should succeed. Maybe I should add conf:timeOut and let each platform set the value as it sees fit. - Jim On 6/28/2014 8:09 AM, Stefan Radomski wrote: Hey there, we’d like to run the non-manual tests as part of continuous integration. As such, we’d be happy if we could reduce their runtime somewhat. Worst offenders are: ecma/test175.scxml = 3.07 sec ecma/test185.scxml = 2.07 sec ecma/test186.scxml = 2.07 sec ecma/test187.scxml = 10.07 sec ecma/test207.scxml = 3.10 sec ecma/test208.scxml = 5.07 sec ecma/test210.scxml = 5.07 sec ecma/test236.scxml = 2.07 sec ecma/test237.scxml = 3.07 sec ecma/test252.scxml = 2.07 sec ecma/test409.scxml = 1.07 sec ecma/test422.scxml = 5.09 sec ecma/test423.scxml = 1.07 sec ecma/test553.scxml = 3.07 sec ecma/test554.scxml = 2.08 sec ecma/test579.scxml = 2.07 sec Total Test time (real) = 65.79 sec Can we reduce the various delay expressions in these tests? I’d vote to cut them all to one tenth of their current values. That is 1s becomes 100ms - I can’t imagine that there is an implementation out there that takes more than a millisecond to process a benign macrostep and it cuts down total time for all automated tests to appr. 1/4th. Total Test time (real) = 18.83 sec It’s not exactly critical to do, but considering how often I run the ECMA tests it more than justified this mail. Regards Stefan -- Jim Barnett Genesys
Received on Saturday, 28 June 2014 15:09:53 UTC