Increase Garage tests robustness #526
No reviewers
Labels
No labels
action
check-aws
action
discussion-needed
action
for-external-contributors
action
for-newcomers
action
more-info-needed
action
need-funding
action
triage-required
kind
correctness
kind
ideas
kind
improvement
kind
performance
kind
testing
kind
usability
kind
wrong-behavior
prio
critical
prio
low
scope
admin-api
scope
background-healing
scope
build
scope
documentation
scope
k8s
scope
layout
scope
metadata
scope
ops
scope
rpc
scope
s3-api
scope
security
scope
telemetry
No milestone
No project
No assignees
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: Deuxfleurs/garage#526
Loading…
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "tests/increase-robustness"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
We are noticing tests failing in a non deterministic way, for 2 reasons:
This PR address these issues as follow:
This PR is not ready for review
Fix #528
WIP: Increase Garage tests robustnessto Increase Garage tests robustnessfa7248c0a1
to70b5424b99
LGTM, maybe we can get a review by @trinity-1686a or @KokaKiwi as they contributed to the testing code? Otherwise we can merge as is.
lgtm
@ -22,3 +22,3 @@
process: process::Child,
pub path: PathBuf,
pub key: Key,
pub default_key: Key,
is this read anywhere?
@ -170,3 +183,3 @@
}
pub fn new_key(&self, name: &str) -> Key {
pub fn key(&self, maybe_name: Option<&str>) -> Key {
I'm not fond of that name, it sounds too much like a getter imo (not blocking)