Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

changes to intense block_tests #718

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 13, 2018
Merged

Conversation

oxarbitrage
Copy link
Member

changes discussed at #565

  • add ltm to update_account_keys test.
  • remove use_address support of update_account_keys test as it is not allowed in live chain.
  • witness_order_mc_test was commented out as it will fail because the feature is not currently implemented however i decided to keep it commented as we might add this in the future, also the monte carlo approach can help as a guide for other tests.
  • the bulk_discount test was removed fully as the feature is not available in the core since a lot, never was live.

@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor

Any idea why these tests are not in the regular test suite? Just because they take longer to run?

@abitmore
Copy link
Member

Read the commit message of cryptonomex/graphene@b134fbe:

Move some unacceptably slow tests to intense_tests
Speeds up chain_tests runs from ~30s to ~5s on my system.

@abitmore
Copy link
Member

Should we move them back to regular test suite?

@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor

On my machine, the modified intense_test takes 6 seconds, chain_test takes 48.
IMO we should move them back.

@oxarbitrage
Copy link
Member Author

ok, moving them back to regular test suite. @pmconrad you think including them in block_tests.cpp is ok or prefer to have a new intense_tests.cpp with them ?

@pmconrad
Copy link
Contributor

block_tests makes the most sense IMO.

@oxarbitrage
Copy link
Member Author

moved.

Copy link
Contributor

@pmconrad pmconrad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure if you want to keep the PR open for #720... unless you are working on #720 I'd say merge this now and create a new PR for the rest.

@oxarbitrage
Copy link
Member Author

lets merge now if @abitmore agree, #720 in a new pull.

@abitmore
Copy link
Member

Please merge this.

@oxarbitrage oxarbitrage merged commit f287324 into bitshares:develop Mar 13, 2018
@oxarbitrage oxarbitrage deleted the issue565 branch June 22, 2019 01:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants