In short, the reason is avoiding potential performance problems. On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Николай Ижиков <nizhikov....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dmitry, > > > So, if you change the call to System.currentTimeMillis(), the test > passes? > > Yes > > > I would propose to either increase TX_TIMEOUT or sleep multiplier to make > test more reliable. > > Yes, I fix test in that way. > > For me the goal of this discussion is to understand reasons to keep current > method implementation. > > > > > 2017-08-09 15:45 GMT+03:00 Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>: > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Николай Ижиков <nizhikov....@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Vladimir, > > > > > > As far as I can understand behaviour of U.currentTimeMillis() breaks > > > transaction timeout test: > > > > > > > So, if you change the call to System.currentTimeMillis(), the test > passes? > > > > > > -- > Nikolay Izhikov > nizhikov....@gmail.com >
