Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 Oct 2002 23:51:41 +0200
From:      "Fischer, Oliver" <plexus@snafu.de>
To:        David Kleiner <kleiner@panix.com>
Cc:        "R. David Murray" <bitz@bitdance.com>, Matthew Whelan <muttley@gotadsl.co.uk>, FreeBSD-Stable <stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: freebsd test matrix
Message-ID:  <3DB5C86D.2010207@snafu.de>
References:  <20021022012432.3866.MUTTLEY@gotadsl.co.uk> <20021022072923.N83973-100000@twirl.bitdance.com> <20021022212449.GA8816@panix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David Kleiner wrote:

> Since the OpenGroup test suites cost $$$, unless there is a sponsor willing and 
> able to pay for it, all those test suites ought to be done from scratch.  So do
> the SPEC-like benchmarks - I am wandering away, since benchmarking is not the same 
> as system validation.  Then there is stress test - system-wide and component
> (fs, vm, net...) - and then, again, on a larger scale somebody has to buy the 
> boxes and put them somewhere.  
> 
> Is there a case for loosely-coupled p2p network of systems running freebsd validation
> suites? 

Is p2p system the right architecture for this? I think what we need - 
for this - is a architecture with a central server to collect the 
results and offers statistics and information for developers and users. 
Reporting would be even nice. To get a mail with the information what 
test X on system Y failed 6 times and so on and so on...

I think p2p is nice in many points, but it doesn't suite our needs.

Bye

Oliver

-- 
Oliver Fischer - plexus[AT]snafu[DOT]de
[de] Das Internet stammt aus dem letzten Jahrtausend!


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3DB5C86D.2010207>