Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork32k
gh-97983: Revert "Lay the foundation for further work in asyncio.test_streams: port server cases to IsolatedAsyncioTestCase"#98015
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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Merged
gvanrossum merged 2 commits intopython:mainfromarhadthedev:utilsTestCase-teststreams-rollbackOct 7, 2022
Merged
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
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
…art 2 (python#97896)"This reverts commit09aea94.
…olatedAsyncioTestCase (python#93369)"This reverts commitce8fc18.
For further debugging, here are some failures in question: |
This was referencedOct 7, 2022
gvanrossum approved these changesOct 7, 2022
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.
OK, I'll merge right away.
mpage pushed a commit to mpage/cpython that referenced this pull requestOct 11, 2022
…o.test_streams: port server cases to IsolatedAsyncioTestCase" (python#98015)This PR revertspythongh-93369 andpythongh-97896 because they've made asyncio tests unstable. After these PRs were merged, random GitHub action jobs of random commits started to fail unrelated tests and test framework methods.The reverting is necessary because such shrapnel failures are a symptom of some underlying bug that must be found and fixed first.I had a hope that it's a server overload because we already have extremely rare disc access errors. However, one and a half day passed, and the failures continue to emerge both in PRs and commits.Affected issue:pythongh-93357.First reported inpython#97940 (comment).* Revert "pythongh-93357: Port test cases to IsolatedAsyncioTestCase, part 2 (python#97896)"This reverts commit09aea94.* Revert "pythongh-93357: Start porting asyncio server test cases to IsolatedAsyncioTestCase (python#93369)"This reverts commitce8fc18.
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
This PR revertsgh-93369 andgh-97896 because they've made asyncio tests unstable. After these PRs were merged, random GitHub action jobs of random commits started to fail unrelated tests and test framework methods.
The reverting is necessary because such shrapnel failures are a symptom of some underlying bug that must be found and fixed first.
I had a hope that it's a server overload because we already have extremely rare disc access errors. However, one and a half day passed, and the failures continue to emerge both in PRs and commits.
Affected issue:gh-93357. First reported in#97940 (comment).
mainbranch #97983