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

Run integration tests again #7304

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 10, 2025
Merged

Conversation

stephanos
Copy link
Contributor

@stephanos stephanos commented Feb 10, 2025

What changed?

Run persistence integration test again.

Why?

They should be running 🙃 Somehow they were omitted when either gotestsum or go test parse the space-separated list of packages to test.

How did you test it?

Potential risks

Documentation

Is hotfix candidate?

@@ -1187,7 +1187,7 @@ func TestSQLiteTransactionContextCancellation(t *testing.T) {
cancel()

err = tx.Commit()
assert.ErrorAs(t, err, &context.Canceled)
Copy link
Contributor Author

@stephanos stephanos Feb 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This yields a data race when the assertion library is trying to wrap the error.

Example: https://github.com/temporalio/temporal/actions/runs/13249022301/job/36982452711?pr=7262#step:7:27

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How this could possible work at all?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🤷

@@ -309,9 +297,8 @@ func TestDLQCommand_V2(t *testing.T) {
},
} {
t.Run(tc.name, func(t *testing.T) {
t.Parallel()
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No data race if you don't run it in parallel :smart:

Makefile Outdated
@@ -413,13 +413,13 @@ prepare-coverage-test: $(GOTESTSUM) $(TEST_OUTPUT_ROOT)

unit-test-coverage: prepare-coverage-test
@printf $(COLOR) "Run unit tests with coverage..."
go run ./cmd/tools/test-runner $(GOTESTSUM) -retries $(FAILED_TEST_RETRIES) --junitfile $(NEW_REPORT) --packages $(UNIT_TEST_DIRS) -- \
go run ./cmd/tools/test-runner $(GOTESTSUM) -retries $(FAILED_TEST_RETRIES) --junitfile $(NEW_REPORT) --packages="$(UNIT_TEST_DIRS)" -- \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are you sure you need = here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@stephanos stephanos Feb 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, but it aligns with the change I'm making in the code coverage PR (where I'm changing all of them to use = for easier parsing)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Add them for other flags on this line then.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@stephanos stephanos Feb 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't yet, because testrunner expects them to be like this right now.

It actually supports both 👍

@stephanos stephanos force-pushed the run-all-tests branch 3 times, most recently from a47d46b to d04305d Compare February 10, 2025 20:55
@stephanos stephanos marked this pull request as ready for review February 10, 2025 21:20
@stephanos stephanos requested a review from a team as a code owner February 10, 2025 21:20
@stephanos stephanos enabled auto-merge (squash) February 10, 2025 21:55
@stephanos stephanos merged commit 20f573c into temporalio:main Feb 10, 2025
49 checks passed
@stephanos stephanos deleted the run-all-tests branch February 10, 2025 22:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants