Bug 270768 - [perfs] 2 failures while running PDE/API Tools performance tests
Summary: [perfs] 2 failures while running PDE/API Tools performance tests
Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: PDE
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: API Tools (show other bugs)
Version: 4.0   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Michael Rennie CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: performance, test
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-04-01 09:42 EDT by Frederic Fusier CLA
Modified: 2012-11-22 19:17 EST (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Frederic Fusier CLA 2009-04-01 09:42:11 EDT 
Verifying results for build I20090331-0901, I see 2 failures in PDE/API Tools
performance tests:

1) testIncremantalEnum	Error	N/A
-----------------------------------
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
at org.eclipse.test.internal.performance.PerformanceMeterFactory.assertUniqueScenario(PerformanceMeterFactory.java:43)
at org.eclipse.test.internal.performance.PerformanceMeterFactory.createPerformanceMeter(PerformanceMeterFactory.java:27)
at org.eclipse.test.performance.Performance.createPerformanceMeter(Performance.java:144)


2) testIncrementalAnnot	Error	N/A
-----------------------------------
java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
at org.eclipse.test.internal.performance.PerformanceMeterFactory.assertUniqueScenario(PerformanceMeterFactory.java:43)
at org.eclipse.test.internal.performance.PerformanceMeterFactory.createPerformanceMeter(PerformanceMeterFactory.java:27)
at org.eclipse.test.performance.Performance.createPerformanceMeter(Performance.java:144)

This is likely due to the fact that testIncremantalEnum	and testIncrementalAnnot already ran before...
Comment 1 Michael Rennie CLA 2009-04-01 10:08:07 EDT 
(In reply to comment #0)
> 
> This is likely due to the fact that testIncremantalEnum and
> testIncrementalAnnot already ran before...
> 

Yes, when tuning our tests we accidentally added the incrementalEnum[Annotation] tests to two parent test classes, which then got picked up twice, causing the exact problem you mentioned.

This has been fixed with the patch on bug 269037 comment # 2