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=-4.7 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 B01DF1FD99 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 17:52:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755427AbcH2Rwd (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:52:33 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:51593 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755136AbcH2Rwd (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:52:33 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD443AA9D; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:52:31 -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=JPexYEsfeNU3/Tld9D79XH0dUqA=; b=H0w63o dp97sJbqi2joK9/1yXUosQfiA/hDhSGjkWqnebf68wt5ApLZX2wehrI13gVNxp3x 7fWPYzPD0H8yeqvDmxhLZUzC+lAeCyC6dDu32GuHGeRdm4/lKUs2KqsaFa0hUc6d the42HNeXzROonC/2qWOSjdMLL7IZocztTs10= 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=st8Cws9aRByXJdnEP4LMErCLTfnqQdAV niSEq/E5tDROmmqS53ki7RtH+/oDHYA3pOi0y51zvC/h35c8tnqyk+iI5tPKZ6sh 7+LwHhBvMJLd6xVkpschl4FnETKqiuPBKSr6c5SJSCj1FyHWla8IhBhflIqcAyTZ uxdx8lciuKk= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B82F83AA9C; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:52:31 -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-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 46EA63AA9B; Mon, 29 Aug 2016 13:52:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Lars Schneider Cc: Stefan Beller , "git\@vger.kernel.org" , Jeff King , Johannes Schindelin , Jakub =?utf-8?Q?Nar=C4=99bski?= , Martin-Louis Bright Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 10/13] convert: generate large test files only once References: <20160825110752.31581-1-larsxschneider@gmail.com> <20160825110752.31581-11-larsxschneider@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 10:52:29 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Lars Schneider's message of "Thu, 25 Aug 2016 21:54:36 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5BB7DE06-6E11-11E6-B19E-F7BB12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Lars Schneider writes: >> On 25 Aug 2016, at 21:17, Stefan Beller wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 4:07 AM, wrote: >>> From: Lars Schneider >>> >>> Generate more interesting large test files >> >> How are the large test files more interesting? >> (interesting in the notion of covering more potential bugs? >> easier to debug? better to maintain, or just a pleasant read?) > > The old large test file was 1MB of zeros and 1 byte with a one, repeated 2048 times. > > Since the filter uses 64k packets we would test a large number of equally looking packets. > > That's why I thought the pseudo random content is more interesting. I guess my real question is why it is not just a single invocation of test-genrandom that gives you the whole test file; if you are using 20MB, the simplest would be to grab 20MB out of test-genrandom. With that hopefully you won't see large number of equally looking packets, no?