Request for review: 8005618 - TEST_BUG: java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Basic.java failing intermittently
martinrb at google.com
Tue Jan 15 02:11:41 UTC 2013
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 5:31 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote:
> On 15/01/2013 7:12 AM, Rob McKenna wrote:
>> Simple enough fix but to be honest I'm not sure any value will *always*
>> work for the dead process waitFor(). Our testing infrastructure seems to
>> glide past whatever we consider to be acceptable tolerances.
> Using the latch seems reasonable but the existing wait/sleep times do not.
> Why waitFor(10000) if the main thread is going to interrupt you after a
> sleep(1000) ???
Actually, in this case it would be even safer to sleep longer, i.e.
without any testing performance problem.
I am tempted to clean up a bunch of those other sleeps that actually
do cause performance problems, as perhaps are you.
More information about the core-libs-dev