Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

fix: extend wait timeout for test_delete_user()#1316

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
nejch merged 1 commit intopython-gitlab:masterfromJohnVillalovos:jlvillal/test_wait
Feb 21, 2021
Merged

fix: extend wait timeout for test_delete_user()#1316

nejch merged 1 commit intopython-gitlab:masterfromJohnVillalovos:jlvillal/test_wait
Feb 21, 2021

Conversation

JohnVillalovos
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@JohnVillalovosJohnVillalovos marked this pull request as draftFebruary 21, 2021 18:11
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commentedFeb 21, 2021
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging#1316 (19fde8e) intomaster (2b29776) willnot change coverage.
The diff coverage isn/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@##           master    #1316   +/-   ##=======================================  Coverage   80.76%   80.76%           =======================================  Files          69       69             Lines        3623     3623           =======================================  Hits         2926     2926             Misses        697      697
FlagCoverage Δ
unit80.76% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown.Click here to find out more.


Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend -Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact),ø = not affected,? = missing data
Powered byCodecov. Last update2b29776...19fde8e. Read thecomment docs.

@JohnVillalovosJohnVillalovos changed the titleTESTING...fix: extend wait timeout for test_delete_user()Feb 21, 2021
@nejch
Copy link
Member

Thanks for looking into this one. TBH I'm not sure anymore if the sidekiq metrics are a reliable source for the slow async operations - the point was to avoid hardcoded sleeps due to the underpowered CI VMs. I haven't taken the time to investigate it, so if you can solve it that's great, but don't lose too much time over this :)

@JohnVillalovos
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Thanks for looking into this one. TBH I'm not sure anymore if the sidekiq metrics are a reliable source for the slow async operations - the point was to avoid hardcoded sleeps due to the underpowered CI VMs. I haven't taken the time to investigate it, so if you can solve it that's great, but don't lose too much time over this :)

Thanks. Doing some debugging at the moment. I'll see what I figure out.

@JohnVillalovosJohnVillalovos marked this pull request as ready for reviewFebruary 21, 2021 19:41
@JohnVillalovos
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Not sure if this fixes the issue. Especially if the sidekick operations can not be counted on.

But it should not hurt.

Have been seeing intermittent failures of the test_delete_user()functional test. Have made the following changes to hopefully resolvethe issue and if it still fails to know better why the failureoccurred.*  Extend the wait timeout for test_delete_user() from 30 to 60   tries of 0.5 seconds each.*  Modify wait_for_sidekiq() to return True if sidekiq process   terminated. Return False if the timeout expired.*  Modify wait_for_sidekiq() to loop through all processes instead of   assuming there is only one process. If all processes are not busy   then return.*  Modify wait_for_sidekiq() to sleep at least once before checking   for processes being busy.*  Check for True being returned in test_delete_user() call to   wait_for_sidekiq()
@nejchnejch merged commit5cc60d5 intopython-gitlab:masterFeb 21, 2021
@nejch
Copy link
Member

Not sure if this fixes the issue. Especially if the sidekick operations can not be counted on.

But it should not hurt.

Cool, I guess the only thing that might happen is that some rogue sidekiq processes will drag this longer, but this was probably already the case and I forget what I was trying to achieve with relying only on the first process 😁

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants
@JohnVillalovos@codecov-io@nejch

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp