-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 505
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Parallel scenarios? #747
Comments
@grosser, apologies for the ping, but any thoughts on this one? :) |
https://github.com/grosser/parallel_split_test does what you want parallel_tests is trying to stay at the file level to keep the integration simple |
this talks about parallel scenarios for cucumber, might do the trick or get close to a solution #679 |
Thanks, @grosser - much appreciated! Would you be open to a PR which updates the Readme to mention that |
sounds good! ... best under tips section or so
…On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 12:37 PM Andrew ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks, @grosser <https://github.com/grosser> - much appreciated!
Would you be open to a PR which updates the Readme to mention that
parallel_tests is intended to act at the file-level, and to recommend
parallel_split_test where test-level concurrency is required?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#747?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAACYZ7FLUQNJHK5LDVEJZ3RA4VHNA5CNFSM4KMIB6V2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEKSAJ7Y#issuecomment-581174527>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACYZ43MJJTUJQ2RHD3UJDRA4VHNANCNFSM4KMIB6VQ>
.
|
It's been… a few years since you said the following, and I'm wondering if your opinion holds:
I bring this up because while
Given that, it makes sense that So I'm wondering… would you be open to adding another splitting strategy to split individual tests across the Processes. Ideally we'd have a way to do pull-based splitting of tests, as was attempted with turbo_test, but it doesn't seem like that went very far. Maybe if/when we finally get first-class parallel test support in RSpec. More realistically, (and II haven't looked into it yet, but…) I wonder how hard it would be to pull over the simple, but rather effective, technique Thank you for your time. |
doing that would completely change the architecture (or I guess add a completely new architecture), so prefer copying what is needed to parallel_split_test instead |
Hi there,
Firstly, thanks for creating such a useful gem - it's helped reduce the duration of our CI pipelines tremendously!
This may be indicative of issues in the size of our RSpec features, but I've noticed that parallel_tests seems to work best with a one-scenario-per-file setup. That is, if there's 10 scenarios in a single RSpec spec file,
parallel_tests
detects it as one test and "allocates" it to one runner.Is there currently a way to "extract" all specs from a file, in such a way that multiple runners could process different specs in a single file at once?
i.e. Given the following spec file:
I would expect the following on a machine with 2 CPUs/cores:
Is this possible? If not, would you be open to a PR adding this?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: