Good, but still not fast enough. The problem was how to utilise all the shiny new cores during one build to speed it up as much as possible. So test execution needed to run in parallel. Some commercial build servers promised to be able to spread build targets over several agents. Unfortunately I had no opportunity to check them out, they cost quite beyond my budget. The only free distributed JUnit runner I found was using ComputeFarm JINI in a research project which did not look mature enough for production usage. Worth mentioning is GridGain’s JunitSuiteAdapter. It's able to distribute JUnit tests across a cluster of nodes. GridGain is a free cloud implementation, it's really hot stuff. But it's not a build solution, so integrating it into the existing build would have been difficult.As I did not find anything useful had to come up with a minimalist home grown solution. I started with a plain JUnit target
junitSequential which ran all tests in sequence:<target name="junitSequential">I used
<junit fork="yes" failureproperty="failed"
haltonfailure="false" forkmode="perBatch">
<classpath>
<fileset dir="${lib.dir}" includes="*.jar" />
<pathelement location="${classes.dir}" />
</classpath>
<batchtest>
<fileset dir="${classes.dir}"
includes="**/*Test.class" />
</batchtest>
</junit>
<fail message="JUnit test FAILED" if="failed" />
</target>
haltonfailure="false" to execute all tests regardless if some failded or not. Otherwise <batchtest> would stop after the first broken test. With failureproperty="failed" and <fail if="failed" /> the build still failed if necessary. There is nothing special here.Ant is able to run tasks in parallel using the <parallel> tag. (See my related post about forking several Ant calls in parallel.) A parallel running target would look like
<target name="junitParallelIdea">Good, but how to split the set of tests into
<parallel>
<antcall target="testSomeJUnit" />
<antcall target="testOtherJUnit" />
</parallel>
</target>
Some and Other? My first idea was to separate them by their names, i.e. by the first letter of the test's class name, using the inclusion pattern **/${junit.letter}*Test.class in the <batchtest>'s fileset. So I got 26 groups of tests running in parallel.<target name="junitParallelNamedGroups">
<parallel>
<antcall target="-junitForLetter">
<param name="junit.letter" value="A" />
</antcall>
<antcall target="-junitForLetter">
<param name="junit.letter" value="B" />
</antcall>
<antcall target="-junitForLetter">
<param name="junit.letter" value="C" />
</antcall>
<!-- continue with D until Z -->
</parallel>
</target>
<target name="-junitForLetter">
<junit fork="yes" forkmode="perBatch">
<!-- classpath as above -->
<batchtest>
<fileset dir="${classes.dir}"
includes="**/${junit.letter}*Test.class" />
</batchtest>
</junit>
</target>
forkmode="perBatch" created a new JVM for each group. Without forking each test class would get it's own class loader, filling up the perm space. Setting reloading="false" made things even worse. All those singletons started clashing even without considering race conditions. So I took the overhead of creating additional Java processes.
Unfortunately the grouping by letter approach had some problems. First the number of threads needed to be specified with <parallel>'s threadsperprocessor or threadcount attribute, else there would be 26 parallel processes competing for four cores. My experiments showed that two threads per processor performed best for the given set of JUnit tests. (Those JUnit tests were not "strictly unit", some tests called the database or web services, freeing the CPU during blocking. For tests with very little IO it might have looked different.)Also my
haltonfailure approach did not work because <antcall> does not return any properties set inside the called -junitForLetter target. There was no Ant command that supported that. But AntCallBack of the Antelope Ant extensions was able to do the trick: After registering the custom task with name="antcallback" I replaced the plain <antcall>s with <antcallback target="..." return="failed">.Separating JUnit test cases by their names produced unbalanced and therefore unpredictable results regarding overall execution time. Depending on naming conventions some groups would run much longer than others. Ant's Custom Selectors are a much better way to split a fileset into a given number of parts producing a few balanced filesets with roughly the same number of test classes.
import java.io.File;One of the four available cores was used for static code analysis, which was very CPU intensive and one was used for integration testing. The remaining two cores were dedicated to unit tests. Using 4 balanced groups of tests executing in parallel, the time spent for JUnit tests was halved again: Yippee
import org.apache.tools.ant.BuildException;
import org.apache.tools.ant.types.Parameter;
import org.apache.tools.ant.types.selectors.BaseExtendSelector;
public class DividingSelector extends BaseExtendSelector {
private int counter;
/** Number of total parts to split. */
private int divisor;
/** Current part to accept. */
private int part;
public void setParameters(Parameter[] pParameters) {
super.setParameters(pParameters);
for (int j = 0; j < pParameters.length; j++) {
Parameter p = pParameters[j];
if ("divisor".equalsIgnoreCase(p.getName())) {
divisor = Integer.parseInt(p.getValue());
}
else if ("part".equalsIgnoreCase(p.getName())) {
part = Integer.parseInt(p.getValue());
}
else {
throw new BuildException("unknown " + p.getName());
}
}
}
public void verifySettings() {
super.verifySettings();
if (divisor <= 0 || part <= 0) {
throw new BuildException("part or divisor not set");
}
if (part > divisor) {
throw new BuildException("part must be <= divisor");
}
}
public boolean isSelected(File dir, String name, File path) {
counter = counter % divisor + 1;
return counter == part;
}
}
<target name="junitParallel4Groups">(Download source code of DividingSelector.)
<parallel threadcount="4">
<antcallback target="-junitForDivided" return="failed">
<param name="junit.division.total" value="4" />
<param name="junit.division.num" value="1" />
</antcallback>
<antcallback target="-junitForDivided" return="failed">
<param name="junit.division.total" value="4" />
<param name="junit.division.num" value="2" />
</antcallback>
<antcallback target="-junitForDivided" return="failed">
<param name="junit.division.total" value="4" />
<param name="junit.division.num" value="3" />
</antcallback>
<antcallback target="-junitForDivided" return="failed">
<param name="junit.division.total" value="4" />
<param name="junit.division.num" value="4" />
</antcallback>
</parallel>
<fail message="JUnit test FAILED" if="failed" />
</target>
<target name="-junitForDivided">
<junit fork="true" failureproperty="failed"
haltonfailure="false" forkmode="perBatch">
<!-- classpath as above -->
<batchtest>
<fileset dir="${classes.dir}">
<include name="**/*Test.class" />
<custom classname="DividingSelector" classpath="classes">
<param name="divisor" value="${junit.division.total}" />
<param name="part" value="${junit.division.num}" />
</custom>
</fileset>
</batchtest>
</junit>
</target>
Epiloge
Using this approach I kept the option to execute the tests one after another with
num=1 of total=1 providing an easy way to switch between normal and parallel execution. This was useful when debugging the build script...<target name="junitSequential">
<antcallback target="-junitForDivided" return="failed">
<param name="junit.division.total" value="1" />
<param name="junit.division.num" value="1" />
</antcallback>
<fail message="JUnit test FAILED" if="failed" />
</target>
