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

roachtest: skip kv/rangelookups/split #51918

Closed

Conversation

aayushshah15
Copy link
Contributor

This test is currently flaking on master. Let's skip it until
@nvanbenschoten's PRs (#51894 and #51888) resulting from the fallout
from the Go1.14 upgrade are in.

Release note: None

This test is currently flaking on master. Let's skip it until
@nvanbenschoten's PRs (cockroachdb#51894 and cockroachdb#51888) resulting from the fallout
from the Go1.14 upgrade are in.

Release note: None
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@aayushshah15 aayushshah15 requested a review from irfansharif July 27, 2020 15:30
@nvanbenschoten
Copy link
Member

Are we sure that #51096 is failing for the same reason as #50865?

I'd actually guess that it has more to do with the recent range cache changes @andreimatei's been making. Specifically, the timing of #51437 is suspect. That change might be altering the number of range lookups we expect under heavy splitting, for better or worse.

Copy link
Contributor

@irfansharif irfansharif left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The skip LGTM given we're tracking this failure mode in #51096. Me associating it with the other splits related issue was unprincipled, so do assign that to @andreimatei if it isn't the same thing.

@andreimatei
Copy link
Contributor

I'll take a look at the test

@andreimatei
Copy link
Contributor

Fixing the test in #52202, so I think this PR can be closed

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.

5 participants