Add unit test to cover key destruction enqueueing case in gcpkms KeyManager plugin #5532
Labels
help wanted
Issues with this label are ready to start work but are in need of someone to do it
priority/backlog
Issue is approved and in the backlog
Comments
rturner3
added
help wanted
rturner3
added a commit
to rturner3/spire
that referenced
this issue
Oct 2, 2024
This test has been historically very flaky on CI. This test covers a very rare edge case that is difficult to simulate in tests and is not covered in other plugins. Opened spiffe#5532 to create a more robust test to cover this case. Closes spiffe#3687. Signed-off-by: Ryan Turner <[email protected]>
amartinezfayo
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 2, 2024
This test has been historically very flaky on CI. This test covers a very rare edge case that is difficult to simulate in tests and is not covered in other plugins. Opened #5532 to create a more robust test to cover this case. Closes #3687. Signed-off-by: Ryan Turner <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
We used to have a test in the
gcpkmsKeyManager plugin calledTestEnqueueDestructionthat checked a case when multiple keys are queued for destruction. There is a limit to how many keys can be enqueued for destruction at the same time, and the test asserted that when that limit is reached, the key destruction operation request is dropped. This test was historically flaky on CI, and the case that was covered in the test is a very rare edge case, so we decided to drop the test in favor of designing a more robust test.We should come up with a new test to replace this old test case to bring code coverage back up in the
gcpkmsKeyManager plugin.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: