PerfRunner - jrunit

[adrian.brock]

Why is jbossmq writing its own peformance framework rather than collaberating with the
jrunit project?
http://wiki.jboss.org/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JBoss_Benchmark_jrunit_overview

[ovidiu.feodorov]

Because JRunit doesn't have all the features we need. We have talked with them about this and eventually we'll probably unify the frameworks, but for the time being JBoss Messaging framework better servers our purpose.

I will let Tim to ellaborate on this.

[timfox]

Most of it was written before I even knew what JRUnit was.

Once I was informed we had some discussions with Clebert and Tom about how to leverage it.

JRunit is currently lacking in some of the functionality we require. E.g. remote tests, so we've added a task to try and integrate them more together at a later date.

http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=71132

Here's some more background:

http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=71280

http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=71064

http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=71132

[adrian.brock]

Yes, but here lies the problem.

* You do your own quick and dirty so you can get on with your main task
* JRunit needs the same stuff so they duplicate work

Now you have at least one person wasting time on redundant infrastructure software.

* The framework is too close to your software

Nobody else gets to take advantage of it (in fact they say "I can't use it,
it doesn't do what I want" - AKA not invented here) and
so they keep re-inventing that circular thing with rubber tires ;-)

Everybody wastes time learning a different framework for each project.

[adrian.brock]

If you say you'll do it later, it won't happen.
Why fix it if it isn't broken.

e.g. The JMX tests were never properly integrated
http://anoncvs.forge.jboss.com/changelog/JBoss/jboss-j2se/src/tests?todate=1131745815000
Only a representative sample are run as part of the main testsuite.

[ovidiu.feodorov]

* You do your own quick and dirty so you can get on with your main task

That's correct. We bumped into issues nobody thought about before so we needed a way to work around the problem and get the work done.

* JRunit needs the same stuff so they duplicate work
Now you have at least one person wasting time on redundant infrastructure software.

Nobody else gets to take advantage of it (in fact they say "I can't use it, it doesn't do what I want" - AKA not invented here) and so they keep re-inventing that circular thing with rubber tires ;-)

Everybody wastes time learning a different framework for each project.

No, they won't move a finger (and I am saying this in a positive way) until we get our prototype do what we want. Then we'll get together and decide what's the best way to port the functionality back to JRunit or merge those two in a hybrid, if at all possible. They are aware of what we're doing and this is a coordinated effort. It's not about keeping re-inventing the circular thing with rubber tires, but needing an segmented metal belt on which our tracked vehicle moves over the ground, then trying to use the circular thing with rubber tires and realizing that actually doesn't do the job ... :)

[adrian.brock]

I wrote a distributed test framework using MBeans a couple of years.

It lets you run all or part of your test on the server.
Sort of like EJBUnit but a lot more flexible.

Unfortunatley it is in the ATTIC, it got rolled back along with everything else.
http://anoncvs.forge.jboss.com/viewrep/JBoss/jbosstest/src/main/org/jboss/test/ServerSideTestCase.java
I never picked it up again and "productized" it.