On 15.5.2014 22:07, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> Yes, I've seen that. Frankly, a test that takes something like 500
> hours is a bit crazy.
Maybe. It certainly is not a test people will use during development.
But if it can detect some hard-to-find errors in the code, that might
possibly lead to serious problems, then +1 from me to run them at least
on one animal. 500 hours is ~3 weeks, which is not that bad IMHO.
Also, once you know where it fails the developer can run just that
single test (which might take minutes/hours, but not days).
> If we really want to run this in the buildfarm we should probably
> try to create a massively cut down test schedule for use in this
> case.
If we can run cut this down in a meaningful way (i.e. without
sacrificing most of the benefits) then sure - let's do that. But I think
that's what CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS is about.
regards
Tomas
