test(store/snapshot): fix flaky test #20078
Conversation
WalkthroughThe update involves enhancing the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Possibly related issues
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
| _, err = store.Save(7, 2, makeChunks(nil)) | ||
| require.Error(t, err) | ||
| _, err = store.Save(8, 1, makeChunks(nil)) | ||
| require.NoError(t, err) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the case of different height should succeed is missed
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Out of diff range and nitpick comments (1)
store/snapshots/store_test.go (1)
323-351: The concurrency test scenario is well-implemented using a wait group and an atomic counter. However, consider adding a test case for different heights to ensure that concurrent saves at different heights are handled correctly.
store/snapshots/store_test.go
Outdated
| if i < n { | ||
| _, err = store.Save(7, 1, ch) | ||
| } else { | ||
| _, err = store.Save(8, 1, makeChunks(nil)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good intend but this condition on n does not make it very readable, IMHO.
Either you can cover the second test case in separate code block or you refactor towards the height as argument. For example:
var (
wgStart, wgDone sync.WaitGroup
mu sync.Mutex
gotErrHeights []uint64
)
srcHeights := []uint64{7, 7, 7, 8, 9}
wgStart.Add(len(srcHeights))
wgDone.Add(len(srcHeights))
for _, h := range srcHeights {
ch = make(chan io.ReadCloser, 1)
ch <- &ReadCloserMock{} // does not block on a buffered channel
close(ch)
go func(height uint64) {
wgStart.Done()
wgStart.Wait() // wait for all routines started
if _, err = store.Save(height, 1, ch); err != nil {
mu.Lock()
gotErrHeights = append(gotErrHeights, height)
mu.Unlock()
}
wgDone.Done()
}(h)
}
wgDone.Wait() // wait for all routines completed
assert.Equal(t, []uint64{7, 7}, gotErrHeights)This approach has the benefit that you can identify the failing height rather than relying on the count. WDYT?
…-sdk into fix-test-flaky-19834
| type ReadCloserMock struct { | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (r ReadCloserMock) Read(p []byte) (n int, err error) { | ||
| return len(p), io.EOF | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (r ReadCloserMock) Close() error { | ||
| return nil |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The ReadCloserMock is used for testing but currently returns a fixed response. Consider enhancing this mock to return configurable data to increase the flexibility and realism of the tests.
- func (r ReadCloserMock) Read(p []byte) (n int, err error) {
- return len(p), io.EOF
+ func (r *ReadCloserMock) Read(p []byte) (n int, err error) {
+ if len(r.data) > 0 {
+ n = copy(p, r.data)
+ r.data = r.data[n:]
+ return n, nil
+ }
+ return 0, io.EOF
+ }
+
+ func NewReadCloserMock(data []byte) *ReadCloserMock {
+ return &ReadCloserMock{data: data}
+ }Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation.
| type ReadCloserMock struct { | |
| } | |
| func (r ReadCloserMock) Read(p []byte) (n int, err error) { | |
| return len(p), io.EOF | |
| } | |
| func (r ReadCloserMock) Close() error { | |
| return nil | |
| type ReadCloserMock struct { | |
| data []byte | |
| } | |
| func (r *ReadCloserMock) Read(p []byte) (n int, err error) { | |
| if len(r.data) > 0 { | |
| n = copy(p, r.data) | |
| r.data = r.data[n:] | |
| return n, nil | |
| } | |
| return 0, io.EOF | |
| } | |
| func (r ReadCloserMock) Close() error { | |
| return nil | |
| } | |
| func NewReadCloserMock(data []byte) *ReadCloserMock { | |
| return &ReadCloserMock{data: data} | |
| } |
Co-authored-by: cool-developer <51834436+cool-develope@users.noreply.github.com>
Description
Closes: #19834
Fix flaky test in storage/snapshot
Author Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
!in the type prefix if API or client breaking changeCHANGELOG.mdReviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
I have...
Summary by CodeRabbit