[test] some excludes

Author: dr-itz

test/rails/excludes/mysql2/FinderTest.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+#
+# The tests below verify that no query is executed. AR-JDBC doesn't actually execute
+# the queries, but fails during binding the params, just like AR would. The difference
+# is in logging. AR only logs _after_ the binds are setup, AR-JDBC logs the whole
+# block since everything is done in Java...
+#
+exclude :test_find_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'
+exclude :test_find_by_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'
+exclude :test_find_by_id_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'

test/rails/excludes/postgresql/FinderTest.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+#
+# The tests below verify that no query is executed. AR-JDBC doesn't actually execute
+# the queries, but fails during binding the params, just like AR would. The difference
+# is in logging. AR only logs _after_ the binds are setup, AR-JDBC logs the whole
+# block since everything is done in Java...
+#
+exclude :test_find_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'
+exclude :test_find_by_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'
+exclude :test_find_by_id_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'

test/rails/excludes/sqlite3/FinderTest.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+#
+# The tests below verify that no query is executed. AR-JDBC doesn't actually execute
+# the queries, but fails during binding the params, just like AR would. The difference
+# is in logging. AR only logs _after_ the binds are setup, AR-JDBC logs the whole
+# block since everything is done in Java...
+#
+exclude :test_find_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'
+exclude :test_find_by_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'
+exclude :test_find_by_id_with_large_number, 'different order in ARJDBC gives false positive'