-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 354
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Inconsistent coverage when running JUnit tests in parallel #760
Inconsistent coverage when running JUnit tests in parallel #760
Comments
I have observed the same, and indeed it seems that PIT is not compatible with junit.jupiter.execution.parallel.enabled = true |
It does so since version 1.1.1, but it would be nicer if parallel execution would be supported properly. |
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
While pitest/pitest-junit5-plugin#74 already worked-around this specifically for Jupiter engine, pitest/pitest-junit5-plugin#91 provides a generic fix that should work with all test engines and was also tested with Spock. So latest when pitest/pitest-junit5-plugin#91 gets merged, this issue can be closed. |
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
This generically fixes hcoles/pitest#760 and pitest#73 for all platform engines, removing the Jupiter specific work-around from pitest#74 and serializing test execution during coverage calculation using locks. This way the tests can also properly run in parallel later on during mutant hunting.
After a single
mvn clean install
invocation, I get inconsistent coverage with subsequence calls tomvn org.pitest:pitest-maven:mutationCoverage
JDK target: 8
JDK target: 14
Something to be noticed
It happens less setting up the target to JDK 8, it happens for JDK 11 as frequently as for JDK 14.
Work around (which is the default for JUnit5):
The source code: src.zip
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: