-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
Remove detected goroutine leaks #2833
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2833 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 76.84% 76.92% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 229 229
Lines 16924 16946 +22
==========================================
+ Hits 13005 13035 +30
+ Misses 3077 3074 -3
+ Partials 842 837 -5
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
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.
❤️
8d033d1
to
2189dc4
Compare
6c51141
to
5b191f4
Compare
c0d84e0
to
be16867
Compare
e7b6db8
to
1e60b4f
Compare
Rebased after the e2e tests refactor |
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.
It mostly LGTM, just a few non-blocking comments and questions.
@codebien How did you see the goleak report? I couldn't see anything from go test -v -race -count=1 ./cmd/tests
on master
, and I can't figure it out from their README 😕 I would like to see leaks detected on master
and then fixed on this branch.
Hi @imiric, thanks for your review. On master, the leak is not reported because we are skipping the check. You should see the report removing this option. Lines 55 to 57 in 0b563d4
|
Hey @imiric, Regarding Httpmultibin I've moved the The current commit history is not optimal so if we have a consensus on the current design I will re-arrange for having atomic commits. |
c2e08fb
to
64c9809
Compare
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.
Almost LGTM 😄
I'd only like to move asyncHook
to the log
package.
There are many subtle changes to the logging mechanism here, and while it visually seems safe, I hope we're not breaking some obscure behavior. The testing for this isn't great, so hopefully we can catch any issues in manual test runs. 🤞
Generally LGTM, with a few nitpicks I commented on or 👍 already existing comments |
ba09a69
to
6df4ba0
Compare
Refactor for better handling and asserting closing operations.
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.
🤞
After #2833 log outputs were stopped but loki didn't wait until it push was finished to signal it was done. Which leads to the actual k6 process exiting before loki could flush its messages.
After #2833 log outputs were stopped but loki didn't wait until it push was finished to signal it was done. Which leads to the actual k6 process exiting before loki could flush its messages.
After #2833 log outputs were stopped but loki didn't wait until it push was finished to signal it was done. Which leads to the actual k6 process exiting before loki could flush its messages.
No description provided.