[Lustre-devel] [cdwg] broader Lustre testing
Roman_Grigoryev at xyratex.com
Mon Jul 16 11:31:32 PDT 2012
> The automated regression suite that we use is great. We should continue
> to improve that over time. But I would content that it is not, and
> never will be, sufficient to tells us if Lustre is stable.
> I would argue that the regressions tests are, in fact, a very low bar.
> And Lustre is just too complicated, networks are too complicated, we
> have too few developers, to ever come up with an automated suite with
> any thing but a relatively low confidence level in the stability of the
> And human testers are given a very different set of goals then
> developers. A developer's job is to make things work. A tester's is to
> do whatever they can to break it. And then create a good report of how
> they broke it so the developers can fix it.
Just for proving your statement that it is not enough just execute
automated regression suite (acc-small) for testing quality I would like to
share coverage summary which we got:
958 tests was executed
Hit Total Coverage
Lines: 79691 128935 61.8 %
Functions: 6206 7935 78.2 %
Branches: 49287 113914 43.3 %
More information about the lustre-devel