-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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
test: fix flaky test-regress-GH-897 #10903
Conversation
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. Fixes: nodejs#10073
/cc @nodejs/testing @Fishrock123 @misterdjules |
If you go with this approach, do you think it might be worth throwing a 0 millisecond timeout into the mix? |
I was going to do that in a subsequent PR (although if someone eager wants to beat me to it, I will be happy to not do it myself). Basically, find out if we're already testing for things like |
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: nodejs#10903 Fixes: nodejs#10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Landed in 80c72c6 |
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: nodejs#10903 Fixes: nodejs#10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: nodejs#10903 Fixes: nodejs#10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: nodejs#10903 Fixes: nodejs#10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-nodejsGH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: nodejs#10903 Fixes: nodejs#10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-GH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: #10903 Fixes: #10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Even after being moved to `sequential` in 1ce05ad, `test-regress-GH-897` still was occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI. The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed reliably on my laptop if I moved it to `parallel` and ran 32 competing node test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to around four times that number. On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints will manifest much sooner. This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource constraints. The test can now be moved back to `parallel`. I am able to run many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures. PR-URL: #10903 Fixes: #10073 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Even after being moved to
sequential
in1ce05ad,
test-regress-GH-897
stillwas occasionally flaky on Raspberry Pi devices on CI.
The test is especially sensitive to resource constraints. It failed
reliably on my laptop if I moved it to
parallel
and ran 32 competingnode test processes. Even for a flaky test, that's unusually low. I
typically don't see problems, even for flaky tests, until I get up to
around four times that number.
On a Raspberry Pi, of course, that sensitivity to resource constraints
will manifest much sooner.
This change checks the order of timers firing, rather than the duration
before a timer is fired. This eliminates the sensitivity to resource
constraints. The test can now be moved back to
parallel
. I am able torun many copies of the test simultaneously without seeing test failures.
Fixes: #10073
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
test timers