Search Results

Search found 30804 results on 1233 pages for 'hardware test'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 17/1233 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • Unit tests and Test Runner problems under .Net 4.0

    - by Brett Rigby
    Hi there, We're trying to migrate a .Net 3.5 solution into .Net 4.0, but are experiencing complications with the testing frameworks that can operate using an assembly that is built using version 4.0 of the .Net Framework. Previously, we used NUnit 2.4.3.0 and NCover 1.5.8.0 within our NAnt scripts, but NUnit 2.4.3.0 doesn't like .Net 4.0 projects. So, we upgraded to a newer version of the NUnit framework within the test project itself, but then found that NCover 1.5.8.0 doesn't support this version of NUnit. We get errors in the code saying words to the effect of the assembly was built using a newer version of the .Net Framework than is currently in use, as it's using .Net Framework 2.0 to run the tools. We then tried using Gallio's Icarus test runner GUI, but found that this and MbUnit only support up to version 3.5 of the .Net Frameword and the result is "the tests will be ignored". In terms of the coverage side of things (for reporting into CruiseControl.net), we have found that PartCover is a good candidate for substituting-out NCover, (as the newer version of NCover is quite dear, and PartCover is free), but this is a few steps down the line yet, as we can't get the test runners to work first!! Can any shed any light on a testnig framework that will run under .Net 4.0 in the same way as I've described above? If not, I fear we may have to revert back to using .Net 3.5 until the manufacturers of the tooling that we're currently using have a chance to upgrade to .Net 4.0. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Catch test case order [on hold]

    - by DeadMG
    Can I guarantee the order of execution with multiple TEST_CASEs with Catch? I am testing some code using LLVM, and they have some despicable global state that I need to explicitly initialize. Right now I have one test case that's like this: TEST_CASE("", "") { // Initialize really shitty LLVM global variables. llvm::InitializeAllTargets(); llvm::InitializeAllTargetMCs(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmPrinters(); llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmParsers(); // Some per-test setup I can make into its own function CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Interpret(...)); CHECK_THROWS(Compile(...)); CHECK_THROWS(Compile(...)); } What I want is to refactor it into three TEST_CASE, one for tests that should pass compilation, one for tests that should fail, and -one for tests that should pass interpretation (and in the future, further such divisions, perhaps). But I can't simply move the test contents into another TEST_CASE because if that TEST_CASE is called before the one that sets up the inconvenient globals, then they won't be initialized and the testing will spuriously fail.

    Read the article

  • Can a power failure or forceful shutdown damage hardware?

    - by Vilx-
    In an unrelated Internet forum I got into a discussion about hardware damage from forceful shutdowns (holding the power button for 5 seconds) and power failures. I was in the opinion that normal PC hardware does not suffer from this - after all, it's not much different than what they experience under a standard shutdown. But another person thought that it could do physical harm to the hard drive and possibly other components as well. He also said that the journaling features of filesystems are useless in face of power failures and were intended to help mitigate damage from system crashes. Now... I think this is nonsense, but then again I lack the experience and knowledge to say it with certainty. Perhaps someone else is more knowledgeable in this area and can shed light on this burning issue? :)

    Read the article

  • Should I upgrade Exchange 2003 or just upgrade the hardware?

    - by JohnyD
    My organization currently has a 4 y/o Exchange 2003 email server (32-bit, Intel Pentium D @ 3GHz, 3GB RAM). It's run very well over the past 4 years but it is time to upgrade its hardware. This server would handle email for approximately 30 clients, a few OWA users with iPhones. My (somewhat ambiguous) question is, when I receive the new hardware should I build out a new Exchange 2003 deployment or should I look at Exchange 2007 / 2010? I've heard that Exchange 2010 requires Sharepoint 2010 (which I am currently not running). Are there benefits that a small-medium sized business can or can't do without? Am I making a horrible mistake staying with antiquated software? Other details: Exchange 2003 (v6.5 + SP2) single front-end server All opinions and thoughts are very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why does Windows 7 need hardware virtualization to run XP mode?

    - by Ken Pespisa
    I have a MacBook Pro and I've run VMware Fusion's unity mode and Parallels' cohesion mode along side the Mac OS X, and both work pretty seamlessly. I figured XP Mode in Windows 7 would be something similar, but I then learned my machine requires hardware virtualization support, which it does not have. My machine is an HP dc7800. That's a dual core 2.2GHz machine with 4GBs of RAM. Certainly it has the horsepower to run a virtual environment alongside the primary OS. I'm wondering: 1) Why Microsoft decided to make hardware virtualization a requirement and 2) What am I missing? Is the experience similar to Parallel's cohesion mode / Fusion's unity mode? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How I disable "Safely remove hardware" in Windows 8?

    - by DarkGhostHunter
    I have a Marvell 91XX and I just updated to Windows 8. The problem I have with the latest drivers 1.0.2.1027 is the absence of "Policies" tab inside the Properties in the Device Manager, where I could disable de "Safely Remove Hardware". It was in Windows 7, but in the new version is not, so the OS shows my two hard disks has removable hardware and I can't do anything about it. Is gone forever? Is in another part? Or is not supported? PD: The best I can come up for a fix is to roll back to Windows 7, see if the option changes some regedit value, export, update to Windows 8 and import.

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V and host-installed hardware devices: can guest VMs access?

    - by gravyface
    Have a couple of servers I'd like to setup as Hyper-V Servers, with a couple of Windows 2008 Standard VMs. On the host, we have a few hardware devices we'd like to be accessible to the guest; I'm not sure if these are supported via a raw "pass-thru" on Hyper-V (which I don't have alot of experience with) if the same drivers are installed on the guest. Hardware in question is a Brooktrout fax card, a SCSI adapter for the tape drive, and a 9-pin serial connected to one of the core firewalls for management.

    Read the article

  • Hyper-V and host-installed hardware devices: can guest VMs access?

    - by gravyface
    Have a couple of servers I'd like to setup as Hyper-V Servers, with a couple of Windows 2008 Standard VMs. On the host, we have a few hardware devices we'd like to be accessible to the guest; I'm not sure if these are supported via a raw "pass-thru" on Hyper-V (which I don't have a lot of experience with) if the same drivers are installed on the guest. Hardware in question is a Brooktrout fax card, a SCSI adapter for the tape drive, and a 9-pin serial connected to one of the core firewalls for management.

    Read the article

  • HP Proliant DL160 G6 - Hardware RAID card to get? [closed]

    - by zhuanyi
    I have bought a DL160 G6 server (Product number: 490427R-001 ) and it does not come with a hardware RAID card. I am trying to set up a VMWare Esxi server and as such I would need a hardware RAID card. I am just wondering if there is any card that would fit into the chassis? Would a P200i fits? How about a P400? Also, would there be any non-HP RAID card that will do the magic too? I have 4 SATA 160GB hard drives already plugged in. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • Direct2d off-screen rendering and hardware acceleration

    - by Goran
    I'm trying to use direct2d to render images off-screen using WindowsAPICodePack. This is easily achieved using WicBitmapRenderTarget but sadly it's not hardware accelerated. So I'm trying this route: Create direct3d device Create texture2d Use texture surface to create render target using CreateDxgiSurfaceRenderTarget Draw some shapes While this renders the image it appears GPU isn't being used at all while CPU is used heavily. Am I doing something wrong? Is there a way to check whether hardware or software rendering is used? Code sample: var device = D3DDevice1.CreateDevice1( null, DriverType.Hardware, null, CreateDeviceOptions.SupportBgra ,FeatureLevel.Ten ); var txd = new Texture2DDescription(); txd.Width = 256; txd.Height = 256; txd.MipLevels = 1; txd.ArraySize = 1; txd.Format = Format.B8G8R8A8UNorm; //DXGI_FORMAT_R32G32B32A32_FLOAT; txd.SampleDescription = new SampleDescription(1,0); txd.Usage = Usage.Default; txd.BindingOptions = BindingOptions.RenderTarget | BindingOptions.ShaderResource; txd.MiscellaneousResourceOptions = MiscellaneousResourceOptions.None; txd.CpuAccessOptions = CpuAccessOptions.None; var tx = device.CreateTexture2D(txd); var srfc = tx.GraphicsSurface; var d2dFactory = D2DFactory.CreateFactory(); var renderTargetProperties = new RenderTargetProperties { PixelFormat = new PixelFormat(Format.Unknown, AlphaMode.Premultiplied), DpiX = 96, DpiY = 96, RenderTargetType = RenderTargetType.Default, }; using(var renderTarget = d2dFactory.CreateGraphicsSurfaceRenderTarget(srfc, renderTargetProperties)) { renderTarget.BeginDraw(); var clearColor = new ColorF(1f,1f,1f,1f); renderTarget.Clear(clearColor); using (var strokeBrush = renderTarget.CreateSolidColorBrush(new ColorF(0.2f,0.2f,0.2f,1f))) { for (var i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { renderTarget.DrawEllipse(new Ellipse(new Point2F(i, i), 10, 10), strokeBrush, 2); } } var hr = renderTarget.EndDraw(); }

    Read the article

  • PARTNER WEBCASTS: EMEA ALLIANCES AND CHANNELS HARDWARE WEBINARS, JULY 2012

    - by mseika
    PARTNER WEBCASTS: EMEA ALLIANCES AND CHANNELS HARDWARE WEBINARS, JULY 2012Dear partner Oracle is pleased to invite you to the following webcasts dedicated to our EMEA partner community and designed to provide you with important news on our SPARC and Storage product portfolios. Please ensure you don't miss these unique learning opportunities! 1. How to Make Money Selling SPARC!3PM CET (2pm UKT), Tuesday, July 10, 2012 The webcast will be hosted by - Rob Ludeman, from SPARC Product Management, and Thomas Ressler, WWA&C Alliances Consultant. Agenda: To bring our partners timely, valuable information, focused on increase in their success during selling SPARC systems. The webcast will be focused and targeted on specific topics and will last approximately in 30 minutes.You can submit your questions via WebEx chat and there will be a live Q&A session at the end of the webcast. REGISTER NOW 2. Introduction to Oracle’s New StorageTek SL150 Modular Tape Library3pm CET (2pm UK), Thursday, July 12, 2012 This webcast will help you to understand Oracle's New StorageTek SL150 Modular tape library which is the first scalable tape library designed for small and midsized companies that are experiencing high growth. Built from Oracle software and StorageTek library technology, it delivers a cost-effective combination of ease of use and scalability, resulting in overall TCO savings. During the webcast Cindy McCurley, from Tape Product Management will introduce you to the latest addition to the Oracle Tape Storage product portfolio, theSL150 Modular Tape Library.This 60 minutes webcast will cover the product’s features, positioning, unique selling points and a competitive overview on StorageTek. You can submit your questions via WebEx chat and there will be a live Q&A session at the end of the webcast. REGISTER NOW Delivery FormatThis FREE online LIVE eSeminar will be delivered over the Web and Conference Call. Note: Please join the call 10 minutes before the scheduled start time. We look forward to your participation. Best regards, Giuseppe FacchettiEMEA Partner Business Development Manager, Oracle Hardware Sales Sasan MoaveniEMEA Storage Sales Manager, Oracle Hardware Sales

    Read the article

  • PARTNER WEBCASTS: EMEA ALLIANCES AND CHANNELS HARDWARE WEBINARS, JULY 2012

    - by mseika
    PARTNER WEBCASTS: EMEA ALLIANCES AND CHANNELS HARDWARE WEBINARS, JULY 2012Dear partner Oracle is pleased to invite you to the following webcasts dedicated to our EMEA partner community and designed to provide you with important news on our SPARC and Storage product portfolios. Please ensure you don't miss these unique learning opportunities! 1. How to Make Money Selling SPARC!3PM CET (2pm UKT), Tuesday, July 10, 2012 The webcast will be hosted by - Rob Ludeman, from SPARC Product Management, and Thomas Ressler, WWA&C Alliances Consultant. Agenda: To bring our partners timely, valuable information, focused on increase in their success during selling SPARC systems. The webcast will be focused and targeted on specific topics and will last approximately in 30 minutes.You can submit your questions via WebEx chat and there will be a live Q&A session at the end of the webcast. REGISTER NOW 2. Introduction to Oracle’s New StorageTek SL150 Modular Tape Library3pm CET (2pm UK), Thursday, July 12, 2012 This webcast will help you to understand Oracle's New StorageTek SL150 Modular tape library which is the first scalable tape library designed for small and midsized companies that are experiencing high growth. Built from Oracle software and StorageTek library technology, it delivers a cost-effective combination of ease of use and scalability, resulting in overall TCO savings. During the webcast Cindy McCurley, from Tape Product Management will introduce you to the latest addition to the Oracle Tape Storage product portfolio, theSL150 Modular Tape Library.This 60 minutes webcast will cover the product’s features, positioning, unique selling points and a competitive overview on StorageTek. You can submit your questions via WebEx chat and there will be a live Q&A session at the end of the webcast. REGISTER NOW Delivery FormatThis FREE online LIVE eSeminar will be delivered over the Web and Conference Call. Note: Please join the call 10 minutes before the scheduled start time. We look forward to your participation. Best regards, Giuseppe FacchettiEMEA Partner Business Development Manager, Oracle Hardware Sales Sasan MoaveniEMEA Storage Sales Manager, Oracle Hardware Sales

    Read the article

  • TXPAUSE : polite waiting for hardware transactional memory

    - by Dave
    Classic locks are an appropriate tool to prevent potentially conflicting operations A and B, invoked by different threads, from running at the same time. In a sense the locks cause either A to run before B or vice-versa. Similarly, we can replace the locks with hardware transactional memory, or use transactional lock elision to leverage potential disjoint access parallelism between A and B. But often we want A to wait until B has run. In a Pthreads environment we'd usually use locks in conjunction with condition variables to implement our "wait until" constraint. MONITOR-MWAIT is another way to wait for a memory location to change, but it only allows us to track one cache line and it's only available on x86. There's no similar "wait until" construct for hardware transactions. At the instruction-set level a simple way to express "wait until" in transactions would be to add a new TXPAUSE instruction that could be used within an active hardware transaction. TXPAUSE would politely stall the invoking thread, possibly surrendering or yielding compute resources, while at the same time continuing to track the transaction's address-set. Once a transaction has executed TXPAUSE it can only abort. Ideally that'd happen when some other thread modifies a variable that's in the transaction's read-set or write-set. And since we're aborting all writes would be discarded. In a sense this gives us multi-location MWAIT but with much more flexibility. We could also augment the TXPAUSE with a cycle-count bound to cap the time spent stalled. I should note that we can already enter a tight spin loop in a transaction to wait for updates to address-set to cause an abort. Assuming that the implementation monitors the address-set via cache-coherence probes, by waiting in this fashion we actually communicate via the probes, and not via memory values. That is the updating thread signals the waiter via probes instead of by traditional memory values. But TXPAUSE gives us a polite way to spin.

    Read the article

  • Test Doubles : Do they go in "source packages" or "test packages"?

    - by sbrattla
    I've got a couple of data access objects (DefaultPersonServices.class, DefaultAddressServices.class) which is responsible for various CRUD operations in a database. A few different classes use these services, but as the services requires that a connection is established with a database I can't really use them in unit tests as they take too long. Thus, I'd like to create a test doubles for them and simply do FakePersonServices.class and FakeAddressService.class implementations which I can use throughout testing. Now, this is all good (I assume)...but my question relates to where I put the test doubles. Should I keep them along with the default implementations (aka "real" implementations) or should I keep them in a corresponding test package. The default implementations are found in Source Packages : com.company.data.services. Should I keep the test doubles here too, or should the test doubles rather be in Test Packages : com.company.data.services?

    Read the article

  • How do people maintain their test suite?

    - by Ida
    In particular, I'm curious about the following aspects: How do you know that your test cases are wrong (or out-of-date) and needed to be repaired (or discarded)? I mean, even if a test case became invalid, it might still pass and remain silent, which could let you falsely believe that your software works okay. So how do you realize such problems of your test suite? How do you know that your test suite is no longer sufficient and that new test cases should be added? I guess this has something to do with the requirement changes, but is there any systematic approach to check the adequacy of test suite?

    Read the article

  • How do I use test Perl modules from test Perl scripts?

    - by DVK
    If my Perl code has a production code location and "test" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, test Perl code is in /usr/code/test/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and test versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/test/lib/perl, is there an easy way for me to achieve such a setup? The exact requirements are: The code must be THE SAME in production and test location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from test to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from test to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. Test versions of scripts must call other test scripts and test libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if test libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between test and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/test/) I will present how we solved the problem as an answer to this question, but I'd like to know if there's a better way.

    Read the article

  • Stress Test tool for Password Protected Website

    - by Jason
    We need to run a stress test on a password protection section of a website we host. What tool (paid or free) would be best for us to use for this? We'd like to be able to create several 'scripts' and then have the stress test simulate X number of users. Each script will have us login as a specific user and then click on some links and submit forms to simulate an actual user. Ideally the software would also create some nice data exports/charts. Server is a linux web server, but we could run this on linux or Windows so software that will run on either is fine.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to undo Mocha stubbing of any_instance in Test::Unit

    - by Craig Walker
    Much like this question, I too am using Ryan Bates's nifty_scaffold. It has the desirable aspect of using Mocha's any_instance method to force an "invalid" state in model objects buried behind the controller. Unlike the question I linked to, I'm not using RSpec, but Test::Unit. That means that the two RSpec-centric solutions there won't work for me. Is there a general (ie: works with Test::Unit) way to remove the any_instance stubbing? I believe that it's causing a bug in my tests, and I'd like to verify that.

    Read the article

  • at what point in the test cycle are the test results written to a file?

    - by jcollum
    I'd like to take the entirety of the test results and publish it to a database. Got the database, got the table, got the script to publish it. Question is, at what point in the ms-test cycle would the results be fully written to the file? And how can I get the path to that file? I'd especially like to grab the "TextMessages" node and put it into my database. I assumed AssemblyCleanup, but the TestContext doesn't seem to be available then.

    Read the article

  • "rake test" doesn't load fixtures?

    - by Pavel K.
    when i run rake test --trace here's what happens ** Invoke test (first_time) ** Execute test ** Invoke test:units (first_time) ** Invoke db:test:prepare (first_time) ** Invoke db:abort_if_pending_migrations (first_time) ** Invoke environment (first_time) ** Execute environment ** Execute db:abort_if_pending_migrations ** Execute db:test:prepare ** Invoke db:test:load (first_time) ** Invoke db:test:purge (first_time) ** Invoke environment ** Execute db:test:purge ** Execute db:test:load ** Invoke db:schema:load (first_time) ** Invoke environment ** Execute db:schema:load ** Execute test:units /usr/bin/ruby1.8 -I"lib:test".... (and after that fails because there's no fixtures loaded) why doesn't it load fixtures (i thought that would be default behaviour) and how do i make it load fixtures before executing tests??? p.s. my test/test_helper.rb content is: ENV["RAILS_ENV"] = "test" require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/../config/environment") require 'test_help' class ActiveSupport::TestCase self.use_transactional_fixtures = true self.use_instantiated_fixtures = false fixtures :all end (rails 2.3.4)

    Read the article

  • How can I use that?

    - by user289220
    test test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test testtest test test

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >