STINNER Victor added the comment: > Victor Stinner wrote: >> Is it a virtual machine or a physical machine? Was your Windows busy? >> Did you run tests in parallel? > > Physical, not really other than the tests, and I ran with -j0 (on a machine > with 2 single core CPUs).
Ah yes, I missed the -j0. I didn't try with -j0. Some tests should be fixed to support shorter sleep, or default sleep should be increased. > I'm not sure what I think of the TEST_SLEEP/TEST_SHORT_SLEEP scheme, but I do > like the idea behind support.check_time_delta. If we cannot agree on the whole patch, I will split it in two parts: check_time_delta() and TEST_SLEEP/TEST_SHORT_SLEEP. > 1) define a support.sleep function that multiplies the value given by some > definable constant (default of 1) before passing the value to time.sleep. Oh, I like this idea. It's closer to what is done currently. > 2) define a support.sleep_until function, which would sleep for a given > interval repeatedly until some condition is satisfied or a timeout is reached. I'm not sure that such helper will provide useful debug info if the test fails. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue20910> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
