Skip to content
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

tests: Add defragment request to linearizability tests #15178

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 24, 2023

Conversation

serathius
Copy link
Member

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #15178 (2619672) into main (045cd44) will increase coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15178      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   74.56%   74.60%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         415      415              
  Lines       34320    34320              
==========================================
+ Hits        25590    25605      +15     
+ Misses       7085     7078       -7     
+ Partials     1645     1637       -8     
Flag Coverage Δ
all 74.60% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️

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

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
client/pkg/v3/tlsutil/tlsutil.go 83.33% <0.00%> (-8.34%) ⬇️
server/etcdserver/api/v3rpc/lease.go 77.21% <0.00%> (-5.07%) ⬇️
client/pkg/v3/testutil/leak.go 62.83% <0.00%> (-4.43%) ⬇️
server/etcdserver/api/v3rpc/util.go 70.96% <0.00%> (-3.23%) ⬇️
client/v3/experimental/recipes/double_barrier.go 68.83% <0.00%> (-2.60%) ⬇️
client/v3/op.go 74.71% <0.00%> (-1.15%) ⬇️
pkg/netutil/netutil.go 69.60% <0.00%> (-0.81%) ⬇️
server/etcdserver/server.go 85.02% <0.00%> (-0.31%) ⬇️
server/etcdserver/v3_server.go 77.66% <0.00%> (-0.18%) ⬇️
server/etcdserver/api/rafthttp/pipeline.go 97.40% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 13 more

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

Comment on lines +301 to +303
if !reflect.DeepEqual(newState, s) {
states = append(states, newState)
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you clarify this change? Shouldn't we always cache the state for failed request?

Copy link
Member Author

@serathius serathius Jan 24, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm adding an exception because of the new Defragment request. As defragment does not impact etcd results, the etcd state does not change. If etcd state does not change, there is no need to "cache" the state on failed request.

Signed-off-by: Marek Siarkowicz <siarkowicz@google.com>
@serathius serathius merged commit 91ec368 into etcd-io:main Jan 24, 2023
@serathius serathius deleted the linearizability-defrag branch June 15, 2023 20:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants