From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FCF72098B for ; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:32:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S942231AbcJSRcR (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:32:17 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:62210 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S938814AbcJSRcQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:32:16 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78CA8457BE; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:32:15 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=b+YO3n9HtPBiqvtHlnqmVeo5nAM=; b=c2lZRY wbL9OLiQvKmBuwuyzZYLHNc36GWLMsdmzDno5cJyKpy6ajYmnSZxfD0Tq34k6WTs PSdb01bp0n9JPi6/4ccuuvMfS9Qi88jLUw5Uyg4nRhRx3pP2uKHGEoovHlfw6GMX 1mNpNvOgyA2r4MNLV8XO9uXIXTPi1p9kSeUHY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=j1MAmmTIG9VZzV35PvQTk/qcbNxtEF8T /i4XiVbr8oYCt7xPho7VxqcCvbYSZrwp86mZH08ShoAB0FHgWxUPs0jrU8O+Qb9b 8nbuNYE6QmNV096y4waZDbsxHuLD9+/VsZyjzpReHK991HEkwT2NzFuHjq1Fto2B +EWyd77C5FM= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70880457BD; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:32:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E1C88457BC; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:32:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Drastic jump in the time required for the test suite References: Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:32:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Wed, 19 Oct 2016 11:18:19 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F9BD590E-9621-11E6-BB9F-3AB77A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > What I can also say for certain is that the version from yesterday (commit > 4ef44ce) was the first one in a week that built successfully and hence > reached the test phase, and it was the first version of `pu` ever to time > out after running for 3h. I am sympathetic, but I'd be lying if I said I can feel your pain. Admittedly I do not run _all_ the tests (I certainly know that I exclude the ones behind EXPENSIVE prerequisite), but after every rebuilding of 'jch' and 'pu', I run the testsuite (and also rebuild docs) before pushing them out, and "make test && make doc && make install install-doc" run sequentially for the four integration branches finishes within 15 minutes, even when I run them after "make clean". Perhaps the recent change to run the tests in parallel from slower to faster under prove may be helping my case. > Maybe we should start optimizing the tests... Yup, two things that come to mind are to identify long ones and see if each of them can be split into two halves that can be run in parallel, and to go through the tests with fine toothed comb and remove the ones that test exactly the same thing as another test. The latter would be very time consuming, though.