466 add delay in testing and planned migration

[khoanguyen-dev]

Changes and Information

Please briefly list the changes made, additional Information and what the Reviewer should look out for:

• Add a time range to each type of test that determines the time it takes until the result is ready (TestParameter.require_time). Also add a time of validity to each test type (TestParameter.validity_period).
• Save the test results of each individual test with the test time of the past (t- TestParameter.require_time).
• Remove m_time_of_last_test in Person to use validity_period instead.

Merge Request - Guideline Checklist

Please check our git workflow. Use the draft feature if the Pull Request is not yet ready to review.

Checks by code author

• Every addressed issue is linked (use the "Closes #ISSUE" keyword below)
• New code adheres to coding guidelines
• No large data files have been added (files should in sum not exceed 100 KB, avoid PDFs, Word docs, etc.)
• Tests are added for new functionality and a local test run was successful
• Appropriate documentation for new functionality has been added (Doxygen in the code and Markdown files if necessary)
• Proper attention to licenses, especially no new third-party software with conflicting license has been added
• (For ABM development) Checked benchmark results

Checks by code reviewer(s)

• Corresponding issue(s) is/are linked and addressed
• Code is clean of development artifacts (no deactivated or commented code lines, no debugging printouts, etc.)
• Appropriate unit tests have been added, CI passes and code coverage is acceptable (did not decrease)
• No large data files added in the whole history of commits(files should in sum not exceed 100 KB, avoid PDFs, Word docs, etc.)

closes #466

[xsaschako]

Please remember to account for the benchmark, as testing is really computationally extensive :-D

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.42%. Comparing base (8889b81) to head (c0f443e).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #866      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.14%   96.42%   +0.28%     
==========================================
  Files         131      132       +1     
  Lines       11049    11061      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits        10623    10666      +43     
+ Misses        426      395      -31     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[khoanguyen-dev]

Basic functionality is implemented and is ready for review. However, the benchmark test is much slower than the main branch. Optimization is needed.

[khoanguyen-dev]

Improved performance for the implementation with test results stored in the past.

Branch main:

Benchmark Time CPU Iterations

abm_benchmark/abm_benchmark_50k 2281 ms 2255 ms 1
abm_benchmark/abm_benchmark_100k 4908 ms 4619 ms 1
abm_benchmark/abm_benchmark_200k 9367 ms 9137 ms 1

Branch #866:

Benchmark Time CPU Iterations

abm_benchmark/abm_benchmark_50k 2391 ms 2367 ms 1
abm_benchmark/abm_benchmark_100k 4767 ms 4741 ms 1
abm_benchmark/abm_benchmark_200k 9543 ms 9484 ms 1

[DavidKerkmann]

Thanks for the changes. I have a couple of suggestions for small improvements.
Is the benchmark up to date or has it improved with the new way of testing in the past?

[DavidKerkmann]

Apparently, there have been a lot of outdated comments that I made earlier. Please check if they are still valid and just resolve them if they are outdated.

[xsaschako]

From my side this looks good. I just did a high-level review.
Questions i had have already been questioned by david and were answered.

[DavidKerkmann]

Thanks! There are only two minor things that I found now which could be slightly improved.