Make RTN17 tests resilient to concurrent requests #959
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
tcard
changed the title
tcard
force-pushed
the
rtn17-fallback-order
branch
from
28f8536 to
4cdfbad
Compare
|
Superseded by #961. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In the test, we were checking that each fallback host got exactly one request. But that's more than we need to check; we just need to check that all fallback hosts are used, in the fake-random order we set.
That extra strictness was causing the test to fail sometimes, as some request would sneak in during the test and duplicate a fallback host. This is because we first set each fallback host as
rest.prioritizedHost, then check if it works, so in between that, all requests are sent to that host.I still don't know why did some extra requests happened since I couldn't reproduce this on my machine and we have limited visibility into CI, but the point is, there's no reason why that should affect the test.
Fixes #931.