-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.1k
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
Fix up ClusterServiceIT #90397
Merged
DaveCTurner
merged 1 commit into
elastic:main
from
DaveCTurner:2022-09-27-fix-ClusterServiceIT
Sep 27, 2022
+39
−31
Merged
Fix up ClusterServiceIT #90397
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
This looks weird to me. Does this mean that you wait at least for 1ms to have passed? And if not, you then wait for 100ms (which defeats the purpose of the while loop -- except for rare cases where the sleep is interrupted within 1ms)?
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.
Ah re-reading the PR description seems to clarify this now. Indeed you want to ensure that it waits at least 1ms. Couldn't we better though try-catch that thread.sleep for InterruptedException?
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.
I encountered a test failure where even the existing 100ms sleep didn't result in
System.nanoTime()
returning a newer time.I don't think we need to catch an
InterruptedException
here, we can just fail the test in that case and let the test runner work out what to do with the interrupt.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.
Wow, that seems like a nasty bug. I see, thanks for explaining.