Fix MonoPublishOnTest flakiness #3898
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
The implementation relied on a specific sequencing of events, which in case of slower hardware or random events would occasionally fail the assertions. This change introduces firm ordering and fixes an incorrect assertion, which assumed the `Mono` terminates without error, while in fact the `RejectedExecutionException` is propagated to the `AssertSubscriber`. In effect, the tests are no longer flaky.
violetagg
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2024
| @@ -127,23 +130,26 @@ public void rejectedExecutionExceptionOnErrorSignalExecutor() | |||
| .publishOn(fromExecutorService(executor)) | |||
| .doOnNext(s -> { | |||
| try { | |||
| inOnNextLatch.countDown(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you may want to fix the formatting
| latch.await(); | ||
| } | ||
| catch (InterruptedException e) { | ||
| throw Exceptions.propagate(exception); | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
| .publishOn(fromExecutor(executor)) | ||
| .doFinally(s -> finallyLatch.countDown()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you may want to fix the formatting
| @@ -182,22 +188,25 @@ public void rejectedExecutionExceptionOnDataSignalExecutorService() | |||
| .publishOn(fromExecutorService(executor)) | |||
| .doOnNext(s -> { | |||
| try { | |||
| inOnNextLatch.countDown(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you may want to fix the formatting
| latch.await(); | ||
| } | ||
| catch (InterruptedException e) { | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
| .publishOn(fromExecutorService(executor)) | ||
| .doFinally(s -> finallyLatch.countDown()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you may want to fix the formatting
| @@ -236,23 +245,26 @@ public void rejectedExecutionExceptionOnErrorSignalExecutorService() | |||
| .publishOn(fromExecutorService(executor)) | |||
| .doOnNext(s -> { | |||
| try { | |||
| inOnNextLatch.countDown(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: you may want to fix the formatting
Thanks. I think I addressed all of them now. |
Sign up for free
to 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.
The implementation relied on a specific sequencing of events, which in case of slower hardware or random events would occasionally fail the assertions. This change introduces firm ordering and fixes an incorrect assertion, which assumed the
Monoterminates without error, while in fact theRejectedExecutionExceptionis propagated to theAssertSubscriber. In effect, the tests are no longer flaky.