Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost-testing] Much longer linux regression run times
From: Tom Kent (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-01 12:54:06

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:08 PM, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Tom Kent via Boost-Testing <
> boost-testing_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I'm not really sure how to trace this down. Is there any way to log the
>> time it takes the various libraries to complete their test suites?
> Not currently. The individual tests can run in parallel. To give you that
> number we would have to save the information as part of the regression data
> and sum it up as part of the regression reports.
>> I'm guessing that will show one library that is using 3+ hours. Although,
>> it is possible that a change went in to a higher level library that just
>> adds a few seconds to each call and is used across many of the libraries.
>> Thoughts?
> Binary search manually? You can limit what tests you run on the command
> line by using the "--include-tests" b2 option <
>>. So
> start off by only running tests for [a-m] or [n-z], then [a-g], and so on.
> Until you find the time hog.

That sounds tough. As a shortcut, I've looked at the libraries that had
commits to develop on the 18th:

It looks like hana, chrono, ratio, and thread (with wave and core/winapi
the previous day). If I get a chance tonight I'll start checking through
 those. Meanwhile, if those authors could look at those and see if there is
anything that might be causing this, it would be appreciated.

> Other than that, maybe it's one of the libraries tested on Travis <
>>. And maybe check the length of
> those first if they are long on Travis perhaps they are also long on
> regular tests.

 I could find the travis scripts for the superset repo (no change in build
time), but I'm not clear on what that is doing. Is it testing individual


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at