GEODE-10455: skipping potentially outdated test to ensure broken build#7886
Open
skysanjay wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:developfrom
Open
GEODE-10455: skipping potentially outdated test to ensure broken build#7886skysanjay wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:developfrom
skysanjay wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:developfrom
Conversation
Member
|
Thanks @skysanjay for your contributions. I have re-ran the unit tests on develop pipeline and looks like this particular test isnt failing. The two tests that were failing are as below (see the pipeline here) |
Author
|
Thank Sai for being patient about proposed changes based on what I
could see and reproduce at first sight, however I was certain that there
are broader missing details to me. I see a need for some level of
refactoring to tests otherwise it is an endless chase.
Is there a way I can ensure build behavior is the same on my local or
central server against the PR's ? or Other ways to help out this project ?
…On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 11:50 AM Sai Boorlagadda ***@***.***> wrote:
Thanks @skysanjay <https://github.com/skysanjay> for your contributions.
I have re-ran the unit tests on develop pipeline and looks like this
particular test isnt failing. The two tests that were failing are as below
(see the pipeline here
<https://github.com/apache/geode/actions/runs/11787261644/job/32841448763?pr=7887>
)
WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest > concurrentExecutionsDoesNotExceedMaxConcurrentExecutions() FAILED
org.awaitility.core.ConditionTimeoutException: Assertion condition defined as a lambda expression in org.apache.geode.cache.wan.internal.WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest
expected: 4
but was: 3 within 5 minutes.
at org.awaitility.core.ConditionAwaiter.await(ConditionAwaiter.java:167)
at org.awaitility.core.AssertionCondition.await(AssertionCondition.java:119)
at org.awaitility.core.AssertionCondition.await(AssertionCondition.java:31)
at org.awaitility.core.ConditionFactory.until(ConditionFactory.java:985)
at org.awaitility.core.ConditionFactory.untilAsserted(ConditionFactory.java:769)
at org.apache.geode.cache.wan.internal.WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.concurrentExecutionsDoesNotExceedMaxConcurrentExecutions(WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.java:216)
Caused by:
org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
expected: 4
but was: 3
at sun.reflect.GeneratedConstructorAccessor9.newInstance(Unknown Source)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:45)
at org.apache.geode.cache.wan.internal.WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.lambda$concurrentExecutionsDoesNotExceedMaxConcurrentExecutions$20(WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.java:217)
WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest > severalExecuteWithDifferentRegionOrSenderAreAllowed() FAILED
org.awaitility.core.ConditionTimeoutException: Assertion condition defined as a lambda expression in org.apache.geode.cache.wan.internal.WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest
expected: 5
but was: 3 within 5 minutes.
at org.awaitility.core.ConditionAwaiter.await(ConditionAwaiter.java:167)
at org.awaitility.core.AssertionCondition.await(AssertionCondition.java:119)
at org.awaitility.core.AssertionCondition.await(AssertionCondition.java:31)
at org.awaitility.core.ConditionFactory.until(ConditionFactory.java:985)
at org.awaitility.core.ConditionFactory.untilAsserted(ConditionFactory.java:769)
at org.apache.geode.cache.wan.internal.WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.severalExecuteWithDifferentRegionOrSenderAreAllowed(WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.java:179)
Caused by:
org.opentest4j.AssertionFailedError:
expected: 5
but was: 3
at sun.reflect.GeneratedConstructorAccessor9.newInstance(Unknown Source)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance(DelegatingConstructorAccessorImpl.java:45)
at org.apache.geode.cache.wan.internal.WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.lambda$severalExecuteWithDifferentRegionOrSenderAreAllowed$17(WanCopyRegionFunctionServiceTest.java:180)
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#7886 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJXWIDVLCOUM3EKK3KKCZ4L2AGM2RAVCNFSM6AAAAABRPJWHE2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDINRZGY4TOOJZGQ>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Contributor
|
@JinwooHwang: It looks to me like this is a |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
For all changes:
Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced in the commit message?
Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically
develop)?Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
Does
gradlew buildrun cleanly?Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?