-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31
Flaky test fixes #580
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
Open
lucian-tosa
wants to merge
5
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
lucian/flaky-test-fixes
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Flaky test fixes #580
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2000bcf
Add persist_for in phase assertions
lucian-tosa b3201cf
Increase timeouts
lucian-tosa 4c1dd1b
Precommit
lucian-tosa 75e91ff
Split persisting in its own method
lucian-tosa 25ce1e7
Merge branch 'master' into lucian/flaky-test-fixes
lucian-tosa File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is persist_for essentially equivalent to "required consecutive successes to pass"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
if yes, then pls leave a brief comment or rename it, it took me a bit thinking to get the meaning of this param
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and one of the reason was that when looking for "persist for" suggest that the "problem persists" or the goal is not achieve yet and the situation persists. When something succeeds it's not often described as a situation that "persists". But I might be nitpicking here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes
Not the best name, I know, I couldn't find a better one. I can add a comment. But do you have a better option?
no_of_successful_passes?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While I'm not a fan of Gomega and Ginkgo I think we should separate "wait for something" from "consistently passes meets something" like they do:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As we discussed, I created a new method
assert_persist_phase, and opened a ticket to track the root issueplease take another look
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks ! I like that we have the two high level methods
assert_reaches_phaseandassert_persist_phaseseparated now.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also like how we now have
assert_reaches_phaseandassert_persist_phase, but still findwait_forto be a bit confusing. It's difficult to get what it does just by looking at the signature.I'm not going to block on this, but if you can think of a way so we can leave
wait_foras it was before and introduce another low level function with a simple signature - that would be awesome.