RFR: 7903750: TimeBudget (-tb) does not fulfill its promisses [v6]

[Galder Zamarreño]

On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 18:13:45 GMT, Jiří Vaněk <jvanek at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hmmm I see, that might be ok for multi-line comments, but if I were you I would look for other multi-line outputs and see what is done there. In JMH multi line comments are just printed as they are, e.g. https://github.com/openjdk/jmh/blob/master/jmh-core/src/main/java/org/openjdk/jmh/runner/format/TextReportFormat.java#L237
>
> Not much similar things to be here.  I Wanted to make clear that that lines are bound together, as that paragraph needs some formatting to be readable.   I had modified it so it is without it, aligned with original time budget :
> 
>    Time budget:
>     Initial completion estimate: 01:60:3600 left; at Mon, 2025-03-24 20:11:16
>     Initial test time: 30 ms
>     FATAL: your tests will never finish as expected. They will run much longer 
>     For 168708 with concurrency factor of 1 You have requested/been given time budget of: 01:60:3600
>     That is ~21 ms per test
>     However the real time will be converging to: 5d+20:1235:74124 +++
>     You can play with internal  properties name(value/eta):
>         jcstress.timeBudget.defaultPerTestMs(3000ms/5d+20:1235:74124)
>         jcstress.timeBudget.minTimeMs(30ms/01:84:5061)
>         jcstress.timeBudget.maxTimeMs(60000ms/117d+03:228:13680)
>       Which are setting up the exact times the individual tests are trying to converage to.
>       Use with caution! Test run below 100ms is moreover jeopardize the purpose. And will not squeeze the time as you wish.
> 
>   Attached the non-interactive output stream.
>   Printing the progress line at most every 15000 milliseconds.
> 
> 
> wdyt? I like the orogonal "table like" slightly more.

I don't have a strong preference for either, but I think it'd be good to be consistent.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jcstress/pull/161#discussion_r2013632544