<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 10/07/2012 10:51 AM, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAGR=i3iTxO=p-wLdc29BQR87xSqdDRbmptymDP5Vioju_PPOxw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p>The unit testd were transferred to file because in_memory db
was leaking memory, causing the jenkins job to go OOM. So this
is ptobably not going to help a lot as the infra team informed
us unit tests should be able to run on a 2gb ram machine.</p>
<p>The flipside of this id that now they take longer, and
sometimes the jenkins job kills itself because cannot finish in
30 minutes.<br>
So, as you native english speakers say, we're between a rock and
a hard place.</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
True. I agree with you.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAGR=i3iTxO=p-wLdc29BQR87xSqdDRbmptymDP5Vioju_PPOxw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p>Assuming we can find a way to stem the memory leak, I would
like to kerp in memory unit tests. I tried, but to no avail. It
seems sqlite does not free memory even if you explicitly destroy
tables.</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
I will try and look around to see if there is some way of freeing
the memory. Do you know which sqlalchemy version is used.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.sqlalchemy.org/blog/">http://www.sqlalchemy.org/blog/</a> indicates that there were some
memory leak issues fixed.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAGR=i3iTxO=p-wLdc29BQR87xSqdDRbmptymDP5Vioju_PPOxw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p>Otherwise, Bob proposed to mount the sqlite db file into a ram
fs. I have not spent any time on thid, but assumung it is
feasible for the infra team, I think this would be the way to
go.</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
I tried this - from what I read it indicated that one should use the
cache pragma. This reduces the time to half but it is still very
high - for example 2 seconds for a unit test.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAGR=i3iTxO=p-wLdc29BQR87xSqdDRbmptymDP5Vioju_PPOxw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p>Last resort would be to shorten the number of tests by removing
test_<pluginname>_plugin modules and appropriate modules
which run only unit tests for covering methods overriden by the
specific plugin.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Il giorno 07/ott/2012 09:09, "Gary
Kotton" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:gkotton@redhat.com">gkotton@redhat.com</a>> ha
scritto:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
There have been a number of issues regarding unit tests as of
late - the main problem being that they are taking too long.
The reason for the increased test time was using a file
instead of memory. I have tried a number of things to improve
the test times but to no avail (for example defining the
pragma cache which I understand uses mmap for the file - this
reduced the time of an average test from 4 seconds to 2
seconds. When using memory this was 0.10 secs). I have
reverted them back to the in memory and suggest that we
discuss on how to tackle the problem in the future. I think
that it is better that we have the tests running and try and
work on a better long term solution off line. I guess that we
can discuss this at summit. Please look at - <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://review.openstack.org/14135" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/14135</a><br>
Thanks<br>
Gary<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org"
target="_blank">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev"
target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>