I find common test very slow to start as well, so I'd be interested to find out why. Have you tried running this via ct:run_test/1 with profiling turned on?
On 24 Sep 2012, at 02:01, Roberto Ostinelli <robe...@widetag.com> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Tim Watson <watson.timo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I find common test very slow to start as well, so I'd be interested to
> find out why. Have you tried running this via ct:run_test/1 with profiling
> turned on?
haven't tried that. weird thing, 20 seconds is consistent.
it is a fresh install on a mountain lion osx.
any pointers? this kinda defeats the purpose of TDD.
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 09:14:53AM -0700, Roberto Ostinelli wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Tim Watson <watson.timo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > I find common test very slow to start as well, so I'd be interested to
> > find out why. Have you tried running this via ct:run_test/1 with profiling
> > turned on?
> haven't tried that. weird thing, 20 seconds is consistent.
> it is a fresh install on a mountain lion osx.
> any pointers?
How do you run it? Consistent 20 seconds sounds like a DNS timeout
issue (stab in the dark).
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Roberto Ostinelli <robe...@widetag.com> wrote: >> How do you run it? Consistent 20 seconds sounds like a DNS timeout >> issue (stab in the dark).
> rebar ct_suites=mymodule
Hi, adding the list.
Please do
$TRACE_F rebar ct_suites=mymodule
and replace $TRACE_F with Max OS C equivalent of "strace -f". Then see what it does just before the 20 second pause.
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Motiejus Jakštys wrote: > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Roberto Ostinelli wrote: > > > How do you run it? Consistent 20 seconds sounds like a DNS > > > timeout issue (stab in the dark).
> > rebar ct_suites=mymodule
> Hi, > adding the list.
> Please do
> $TRACE_F rebar ct_suites=mymodule
Make that
$TRACE_F rebar suites=mymodule
and also consider running rebar with fprof:
$TRACE_F rebar -p suites=mymodule or $TRACE_F rebar --profile suites=mymodule
, but make sure you update rebar first to avoid a faulty call to fprof:apply/2.
I finally managed to track this down but I'm totally unsure why this
happens. Motiejus, you were right.
When I run REBAR, the process automountd tries to connect on port 111
(sunrpc) on my local NAT. When it times out, the CT tests are actually run.
If I simply block this process with a firewall, tests start immediately.
I'm at disposal if anyone wants to dig further (tuncer?)
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Tuncer Ayaz <tuncer.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Motiejus Jakštys wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Roberto Ostinelli wrote:
> > > > How do you run it? Consistent 20 seconds sounds like a DNS
> > > > timeout issue (stab in the dark).
Whoa, this is fascinating Roberto. Did you try running common test from the shell by hand and see if it still happens, i.e., by running something like this:
> I finally managed to track this down but I'm totally unsure why this happens. Motiejus, you were right.
> When I run REBAR, the process automountd tries to connect on port 111 (sunrpc) on my local NAT. When it times out, the CT tests are actually run. If I simply block this process with a firewall, tests start immediately.
> I'm at disposal if anyone wants to dig further (tuncer?)
> r.
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Tuncer Ayaz <tuncer.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Motiejus Jakštys wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Roberto Ostinelli wrote:
> > > > How do you run it? Consistent 20 seconds sounds like a DNS
> > > > timeout issue (stab in the dark).
> Whoa, this is fascinating Roberto. Did you try running common test from the shell by hand and see if it still happens, i.e., by running something like this:
> On 11 Oct 2012, at 04:38, Roberto Ostinelli wrote:
>> Ok,
>> I finally managed to track this down but I'm totally unsure why this happens. Motiejus, you were right.
>> When I run REBAR, the process automountd tries to connect on port 111 (sunrpc) on my local NAT. When it times out, the CT tests are actually run. If I simply block this process with a firewall, tests start immediately.
>> I'm at disposal if anyone wants to dig further (tuncer?)
>> r.
Is anything in PATH or ERL_LIBS & similar environment vars referring
to a non-existent mountpoint?
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Tim Watson <watson.timo...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Whoa, this is fascinating Roberto. Did you try running common test from
> the shell by hand and see if it still happens, i.e., by running something
> like this: