You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tomee.apache.org by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com> on 2014/07/15 17:58:05 UTC
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more accurate
than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> Author: andygumbrecht
> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> New Revision: 1610729
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
> Log:
> 1ms is quite a long time
>
> Modified:
>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>
> Modified:
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> URL:
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
>
> ==============================================================================
> ---
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> (original)
> +++
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
> */
> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
>
> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
> import org.junit.Test;
> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
>
> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
>
> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> +
> + @AfterClass
> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
> + OpenEJB.destroy();
> + }
> +
> @EJB
> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
>
> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>
> @Test
> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
> - assertTrue(async > start);
> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
> }
>
> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
> // no-op
> }
> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
> }
>
> @Asynchronous
> public Future<Boolean> async() {
> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
> asyncInstance = this;
> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
> }
>
>
>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Andy Gumbrecht <ag...@tomitribe.com>.
The real fix here was that the test was using > (greater than 1ms), but
if the test ran exeptionally well then the difference was less than 1ms.
So changing to >= actually fixes currentTimeMS, and nano just makes it
unlikely ever to be =.
Andy.
On 16/07/2014 10:55, Jean-Louis Monteiro wrote:
> Ah ok, did not answer yesterday cause I was wondering if my eyes were
> blinking or if I was totally out.
>
> What about the test?
> Do we remove it?
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yep
>>
>> the link was not linked (hehe) to this particular test but was more
>> generic.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-07-16 10:40 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
>>> right, wrong .... blue, green ... not enough
>>> If we don't need high precision, still not see any link to the blog entry
>>> you pointed.
>>> The test explicitly test we don't fire any asynch method before the bean
>>> become fully initialized (end of @PostConstruct).
>>>
>>> That is the only test method of this class.
>>> So, if wrong, fix it!
>>> If not relevant, fix it or remove it!
>>> If fine, then as we sleep 100ms, ms or ns is not that important, I agree,
>>> but we are plenty of tests relying on time, and we know that on windows
>> it
>>> sucks when using timemillis. Using nano, at least ensure that end -
>> start >
>>> 0
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> we don't care ns or ms in our tests (which is fine since that's not
>>>> exactly what we test) but both are wrong, that's all :).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-07-15 18:19 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>>>>> Not sure to understand your point/msg.
>>>>> I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time
>> to
>>>>> read it.
>>>>> I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations
>> accordingly.
>>>>> It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
>>>>> precision, we only care about the difference.
>>>>> So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
>>>>> better than timeMillis.
>>>>>
>>>>> The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only
>> the
>>>>> difference.
>>>>> If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
>>>>> appreciated I'm sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> JLouis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>>>>>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>>>>>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>>>>>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>>>> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>>>>>>> Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more
>>>> accurate
>>>>>>> than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jean-Louis Monteiro
>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Author: andygumbrecht
>>>>>>>> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>>>>>>>> New Revision: 1610729
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
>>>>>>>> Log:
>>>>>>>> 1ms is quite a long time
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>>>>>>>> Modified:
>>>>>>>>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>>>>>>>> URL:
>>>>>>>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
>>>>>>>>
>> ==============================================================================
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>>>>>>>> (original)
>>>>>>>> +++
>>>>>>>>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>>>>>>>> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>>>>>>>> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
>>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
>>>>>>>> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
>>>>>>>> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
>>>>>>>> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
>>>>>>>> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
>>>>>>>> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
>>>>>>>> import org.junit.Test;
>>>>>>>> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
>>>>>>>> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + @AfterClass
>>>>>>>> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
>>>>>>>> + OpenEJB.destroy();
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> @EJB
>>>>>>>> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @Test
>>>>>>>> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
>>>>>>>> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>>>>>>>> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>>>>>>>> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
>>>>>>>> - assertTrue(async > start);
>>>>>>>> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
>>>>>>>> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
>>>>>>>> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>>>>>>>> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
>>>>>>>> // no-op
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
>>>>>>>> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @Asynchronous
>>>>>>>> public Future<Boolean> async() {
>>>>>>>> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
>>>>>>>> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
>>>>>>>> asyncInstance = this;
>>>>>>>> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
--
Andy Gumbrecht
http://www.tomitribe.com
agumbrecht@tomitribe.com
https://twitter.com/AndyGeeDe
TomEE treibt Tomitribe! | http://tomee.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
The fix is fine, was mainly to share this interesting reading more
than anything else
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-07-16 10:55 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> Ah ok, did not answer yesterday cause I was wondering if my eyes were
> blinking or if I was totally out.
>
> What about the test?
> Do we remove it?
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yep
>>
>> the link was not linked (hehe) to this particular test but was more
>> generic.
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-07-16 10:40 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
>> > right, wrong .... blue, green ... not enough
>> > If we don't need high precision, still not see any link to the blog entry
>> > you pointed.
>> > The test explicitly test we don't fire any asynch method before the bean
>> > become fully initialized (end of @PostConstruct).
>> >
>> > That is the only test method of this class.
>> > So, if wrong, fix it!
>> > If not relevant, fix it or remove it!
>> > If fine, then as we sleep 100ms, ms or ns is not that important, I agree,
>> > but we are plenty of tests relying on time, and we know that on windows
>> it
>> > sucks when using timemillis. Using nano, at least ensure that end -
>> start >
>> > 0
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> we don't care ns or ms in our tests (which is fine since that's not
>> >> exactly what we test) but both are wrong, that's all :).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-07-15 18:19 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>> >> > Not sure to understand your point/msg.
>> >> > I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time
>> to
>> >> > read it.
>> >> > I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations
>> accordingly.
>> >> >
>> >> > It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
>> >> > precision, we only care about the difference.
>> >> > So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
>> >> > better than timeMillis.
>> >> >
>> >> > The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only
>> the
>> >> > difference.
>> >> > If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
>> >> > appreciated I'm sure.
>> >> >
>> >> > JLouis
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> >> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> >> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>> >> >> > Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more
>> >> accurate
>> >> >> > than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> >> >> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> >> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Author: andygumbrecht
>> >> >> >> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> >> >> >> New Revision: 1610729
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
>> >> >> >> Log:
>> >> >> >> 1ms is quite a long time
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Modified:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Modified:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> >> URL:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> ==============================================================================
>> >> >> >> ---
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> >> (original)
>> >> >> >> +++
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> >> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> >> >> >> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
>> >> >> >> */
>> >> >> >> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
>> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
>> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
>> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
>> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
>> >> >> >> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
>> >> >> >> import org.junit.Test;
>> >> >> >> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
>> >> >> >> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> >> >> +
>> >> >> >> + @AfterClass
>> >> >> >> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
>> >> >> >> + OpenEJB.destroy();
>> >> >> >> + }
>> >> >> >> +
>> >> >> >> @EJB
>> >> >> >> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @Test
>> >> >> >> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
>> >> >> >> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> >> >> >> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> >> >> >> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
>> >> >> >> - assertTrue(async > start);
>> >> >> >> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
>> >> >> >> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
>> >> >> >> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
>> >> >> >> }
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> >> >> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
>> >> >> >> // no-op
>> >> >> >> }
>> >> >> >> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> >> >> >> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
>> >> >> >> }
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> @Asynchronous
>> >> >> >> public Future<Boolean> async() {
>> >> >> >> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> >> >> >> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
>> >> >> >> asyncInstance = this;
>> >> >> >> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
>> >> >> >> }
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
Ah ok, did not answer yesterday cause I was wondering if my eyes were
blinking or if I was totally out.
What about the test?
Do we remove it?
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Yep
>
> the link was not linked (hehe) to this particular test but was more
> generic.
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-07-16 10:40 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> > right, wrong .... blue, green ... not enough
> > If we don't need high precision, still not see any link to the blog entry
> > you pointed.
> > The test explicitly test we don't fire any asynch method before the bean
> > become fully initialized (end of @PostConstruct).
> >
> > That is the only test method of this class.
> > So, if wrong, fix it!
> > If not relevant, fix it or remove it!
> > If fine, then as we sleep 100ms, ms or ns is not that important, I agree,
> > but we are plenty of tests relying on time, and we know that on windows
> it
> > sucks when using timemillis. Using nano, at least ensure that end -
> start >
> > 0
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> we don't care ns or ms in our tests (which is fine since that's not
> >> exactly what we test) but both are wrong, that's all :).
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-07-15 18:19 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> >> > Not sure to understand your point/msg.
> >> > I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time
> to
> >> > read it.
> >> > I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations
> accordingly.
> >> >
> >> > It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
> >> > precision, we only care about the difference.
> >> > So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
> >> > better than timeMillis.
> >> >
> >> > The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only
> the
> >> > difference.
> >> > If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
> >> > appreciated I'm sure.
> >> >
> >> > JLouis
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> >> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> >> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> >> >> > Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more
> >> accurate
> >> >> > than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >> >> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Author: andygumbrecht
> >> >> >> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> >> >> >> New Revision: 1610729
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
> >> >> >> Log:
> >> >> >> 1ms is quite a long time
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Modified:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Modified:
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> >> URL:
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> ==============================================================================
> >> >> >> ---
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> >> (original)
> >> >> >> +++
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> >> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> >> >> >> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
> >> >> >> */
> >> >> >> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
> >> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
> >> >> >> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
> >> >> >> import org.junit.Test;
> >> >> >> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
> >> >> >> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> >> >> +
> >> >> >> + @AfterClass
> >> >> >> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
> >> >> >> + OpenEJB.destroy();
> >> >> >> + }
> >> >> >> +
> >> >> >> @EJB
> >> >> >> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> @Test
> >> >> >> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
> >> >> >> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> >> >> >> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> >> >> >> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
> >> >> >> - assertTrue(async > start);
> >> >> >> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
> >> >> >> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
> >> >> >> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
> >> >> >> }
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> >> >> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
> >> >> >> // no-op
> >> >> >> }
> >> >> >> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
> >> >> >> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
> >> >> >> }
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> @Asynchronous
> >> >> >> public Future<Boolean> async() {
> >> >> >> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
> >> >> >> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
> >> >> >> asyncInstance = this;
> >> >> >> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
> >> >> >> }
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Yep
the link was not linked (hehe) to this particular test but was more generic.
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-07-16 10:40 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> right, wrong .... blue, green ... not enough
> If we don't need high precision, still not see any link to the blog entry
> you pointed.
> The test explicitly test we don't fire any asynch method before the bean
> become fully initialized (end of @PostConstruct).
>
> That is the only test method of this class.
> So, if wrong, fix it!
> If not relevant, fix it or remove it!
> If fine, then as we sleep 100ms, ms or ns is not that important, I agree,
> but we are plenty of tests relying on time, and we know that on windows it
> sucks when using timemillis. Using nano, at least ensure that end - start >
> 0
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> we don't care ns or ms in our tests (which is fine since that's not
>> exactly what we test) but both are wrong, that's all :).
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-07-15 18:19 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
>> > Not sure to understand your point/msg.
>> > I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time to
>> > read it.
>> > I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations accordingly.
>> >
>> > It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
>> > precision, we only care about the difference.
>> > So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
>> > better than timeMillis.
>> >
>> > The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only the
>> > difference.
>> > If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
>> > appreciated I'm sure.
>> >
>> > JLouis
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
>> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
>> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
>> >> > Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more
>> accurate
>> >> > than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> >> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Author: andygumbrecht
>> >> >> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> >> >> New Revision: 1610729
>> >> >>
>> >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
>> >> >> Log:
>> >> >> 1ms is quite a long time
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Modified:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Modified:
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> URL:
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> ==============================================================================
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> (original)
>> >> >> +++
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> >> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> >> >> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
>> >> >> */
>> >> >> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
>> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
>> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
>> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
>> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
>> >> >> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
>> >> >> import org.junit.Test;
>> >> >> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
>> >> >> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> >> +
>> >> >> + @AfterClass
>> >> >> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
>> >> >> + OpenEJB.destroy();
>> >> >> + }
>> >> >> +
>> >> >> @EJB
>> >> >> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @Test
>> >> >> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
>> >> >> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> >> >> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> >> >> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
>> >> >> - assertTrue(async > start);
>> >> >> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
>> >> >> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
>> >> >> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
>> >> >> }
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> >> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
>> >> >> // no-op
>> >> >> }
>> >> >> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> >> >> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
>> >> >> }
>> >> >>
>> >> >> @Asynchronous
>> >> >> public Future<Boolean> async() {
>> >> >> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> >> >> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
>> >> >> asyncInstance = this;
>> >> >> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
>> >> >> }
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
right, wrong .... blue, green ... not enough
If we don't need high precision, still not see any link to the blog entry
you pointed.
The test explicitly test we don't fire any asynch method before the bean
become fully initialized (end of @PostConstruct).
That is the only test method of this class.
So, if wrong, fix it!
If not relevant, fix it or remove it!
If fine, then as we sleep 100ms, ms or ns is not that important, I agree,
but we are plenty of tests relying on time, and we know that on windows it
sucks when using timemillis. Using nano, at least ensure that end - start >
0
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> we don't care ns or ms in our tests (which is fine since that's not
> exactly what we test) but both are wrong, that's all :).
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-07-15 18:19 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> > Not sure to understand your point/msg.
> > I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time to
> > read it.
> > I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations accordingly.
> >
> > It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
> > precision, we only care about the difference.
> > So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
> > better than timeMillis.
> >
> > The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only the
> > difference.
> > If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
> > appreciated I'm sure.
> >
> > JLouis
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibucau@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
> >>
> >>
> >> Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> >> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> >> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> >> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <
> jlmonteiro@tomitribe.com>:
> >> > Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more
> accurate
> >> > than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> >> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> >> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Author: andygumbrecht
> >> >> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> >> >> New Revision: 1610729
> >> >>
> >> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
> >> >> Log:
> >> >> 1ms is quite a long time
> >> >>
> >> >> Modified:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >>
> >> >> Modified:
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> URL:
> >> >>
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> ==============================================================================
> >> >> ---
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> (original)
> >> >> +++
> >> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> >> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> >> >> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
> >> >> */
> >> >> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
> >> >>
> >> >> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
> >> >> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
> >> >> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
> >> >> import org.junit.Test;
> >> >> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
> >> >>
> >> >> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
> >> >>
> >> >> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
> >> >> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> >> +
> >> >> + @AfterClass
> >> >> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
> >> >> + OpenEJB.destroy();
> >> >> + }
> >> >> +
> >> >> @EJB
> >> >> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
> >> >>
> >> >> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> >>
> >> >> @Test
> >> >> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
> >> >> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> >> >> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> >> >> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
> >> >> - assertTrue(async > start);
> >> >> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
> >> >> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
> >> >> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> >> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
> >> >> // no-op
> >> >> }
> >> >> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
> >> >> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> @Asynchronous
> >> >> public Future<Boolean> async() {
> >> >> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
> >> >> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
> >> >> asyncInstance = this;
> >> >> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
we don't care ns or ms in our tests (which is fine since that's not
exactly what we test) but both are wrong, that's all :).
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-07-15 18:19 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> Not sure to understand your point/msg.
> I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time to
> read it.
> I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations accordingly.
>
> It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
> precision, we only care about the difference.
> So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
> better than timeMillis.
>
> The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only the
> difference.
> If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
> appreciated I'm sure.
>
> JLouis
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
>>
>>
>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>> Twitter: @rmannibucau
>> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
>> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
>> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>>
>>
>> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
>> > Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more accurate
>> > than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
>> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
>> > http://www.tomitribe.com
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Author: andygumbrecht
>> >> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> >> New Revision: 1610729
>> >>
>> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
>> >> Log:
>> >> 1ms is quite a long time
>> >>
>> >> Modified:
>> >>
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >>
>> >> Modified:
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> URL:
>> >>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
>> >>
>> >>
>> ==============================================================================
>> >> ---
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> (original)
>> >> +++
>> >>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> >> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> >> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
>> >> */
>> >> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
>> >>
>> >> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
>> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
>> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
>> >> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
>> >> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
>> >> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
>> >> import org.junit.Test;
>> >> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
>> >>
>> >> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
>> >>
>> >> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
>> >> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> +
>> >> + @AfterClass
>> >> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
>> >> + OpenEJB.destroy();
>> >> + }
>> >> +
>> >> @EJB
>> >> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
>> >>
>> >> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >>
>> >> @Test
>> >> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
>> >> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> >> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> >> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
>> >> - assertTrue(async > start);
>> >> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
>> >> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
>> >> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> >> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
>> >> // no-op
>> >> }
>> >> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> >> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >> @Asynchronous
>> >> public Future<Boolean> async() {
>> >> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> >> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
>> >> asyncInstance = this;
>> >> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>.
Not sure to understand your point/msg.
I don't really care about the 10 pages benchmarks and I have no time to
read it.
I only care about the java contract and JVM implementations accordingly.
It looks out of context here IMHO as we don't care about the absolute
precision, we only care about the difference.
So regarding the test case above, I still agree going with nanoTime is
better than timeMillis.
The test is wrong btw, it should not compare absolute values but only the
difference.
If there is an interesting outcome, feel free to share, it will be
appreciated I'm sure.
JLouis
--
Jean-Louis Monteiro
http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
http://www.tomitribe.com
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
>
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> Twitter: @rmannibucau
> Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
> LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
> Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
>
>
> 2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> > Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more accurate
> > than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jean-Louis Monteiro
> > http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> > http://www.tomitribe.com
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Author: andygumbrecht
> >> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> >> New Revision: 1610729
> >>
> >> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
> >> Log:
> >> 1ms is quite a long time
> >>
> >> Modified:
> >>
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >>
> >> Modified:
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> URL:
> >>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
> >>
> >>
> ==============================================================================
> >> ---
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> (original)
> >> +++
> >>
> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
> >> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
> >> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
> >> */
> >> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
> >>
> >> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
> >> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
> >> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
> >> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
> >> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
> >> import org.junit.Test;
> >> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
> >>
> >> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
> >>
> >> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
> >> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> +
> >> + @AfterClass
> >> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
> >> + OpenEJB.destroy();
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> @EJB
> >> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
> >>
> >> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >>
> >> @Test
> >> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
> >> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> >> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
> >> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
> >> - assertTrue(async > start);
> >> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
> >> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
> >> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
> >> }
> >>
> >> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
> >> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
> >> // no-op
> >> }
> >> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
> >> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
> >> }
> >>
> >> @Asynchronous
> >> public Future<Boolean> async() {
> >> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
> >> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
> >> asyncInstance = this;
> >> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
> >> }
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
Re: svn commit: r1610729 - /tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
can't resist: http://shipilev.net/blog/2014/nanotrusting-nanotime/
Romain Manni-Bucau
Twitter: @rmannibucau
Blog: http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/
LinkedIn: http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau
Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau
2014-07-15 17:58 GMT+02:00 Jean-Louis Monteiro <jl...@tomitribe.com>:
> Definitely for measuring delay nanoTime is better and much more accurate
> than timeMillis especially on non unix machins.
>
>
>
> --
> Jean-Louis Monteiro
> http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro
> http://www.tomitribe.com
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 5:51 PM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Author: andygumbrecht
>> Date: Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> New Revision: 1610729
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1610729
>> Log:
>> 1ms is quite a long time
>>
>> Modified:
>>
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>>
>> Modified:
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> URL:
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java?rev=1610729&r1=1610728&r2=1610729&view=diff
>>
>> ==============================================================================
>> ---
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> (original)
>> +++
>> tomee/tomee/branches/tomee-1.7.x/container/openejb-core/src/test/java/org/apache/openejb/core/singleton/AsyncPostContructTest.java
>> Tue Jul 15 15:51:08 2014
>> @@ -16,10 +16,12 @@
>> */
>> package org.apache.openejb.core.singleton;
>>
>> +import org.apache.openejb.OpenEJB;
>> import org.apache.openejb.jee.EnterpriseBean;
>> import org.apache.openejb.jee.SingletonBean;
>> import org.apache.openejb.junit.ApplicationComposer;
>> import org.apache.openejb.testing.Module;
>> +import org.junit.AfterClass;
>> import org.junit.Test;
>> import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
>>
>> @@ -38,6 +40,12 @@ import static org.testng.Assert.assertTr
>>
>> @RunWith(ApplicationComposer.class)
>> public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> +
>> + @AfterClass
>> + public static void afterClass() throws Exception {
>> + OpenEJB.destroy();
>> + }
>> +
>> @EJB
>> private BuildMeAsync buildMeAsync;
>>
>> @@ -50,9 +58,9 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>>
>> @Test
>> public void postConstructShouldEndsBeforeAsyncCall() {
>> - final long start = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> + final long constructed = buildMeAsync.getStartEnd();
>> final long async = buildMeAsync.getAsyncStart();
>> - assertTrue(async > start);
>> + assertTrue(async >= constructed);
>> assertSame(buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance(),
>> buildMeAsync.getAsyncInstance());
>> }
>>
>> @@ -77,12 +85,12 @@ public class AsyncPostContructTest {
>> } catch (final InterruptedException e) {
>> // no-op
>> }
>> - startEnd = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> + startEnd = System.nanoTime();
>> }
>>
>> @Asynchronous
>> public Future<Boolean> async() {
>> - asyncStart = System.currentTimeMillis();
>> + asyncStart = System.nanoTime();
>> asyncInstance = this;
>> return new AsyncResult<Boolean>(true);
>> }
>>
>>
>>