You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to notifications@ignite.apache.org by "JAkutenshi (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2025/06/12 08:41:07 UTC
[PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
JAkutenshi opened a new pull request, #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029
JIRA Ticket: [IGNITE-25654](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-25654)
## The goal
## The reason
## The solution
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
Posted by "JAkutenshi (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
JAkutenshi commented on code in PR #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029#discussion_r2142338798
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
+ // won't be updated if the test will compute too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
+ // given above commit timestamp.
+ clock.update(clock.now().addPhysicalTime(10));
Review Comment:
Changed to `clock#update` with commit timestamp as the argument, the method will increment clock value that will be guarantee later than the commit timestamp.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
Posted by "rpuch (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rpuch merged PR #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
Posted by "rpuch (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
rpuch commented on code in PR #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029#discussion_r2142279838
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
Review Comment:
```suggestion
// We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypassing ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
```
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
+ // won't be updated if the test will compute too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
Review Comment:
```suggestion
// won't be updated if the test computes too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
```
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
+ // won't be updated if the test will compute too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
+ // given above commit timestamp.
+ clock.update(clock.now().addPhysicalTime(10));
Review Comment:
Why 10? Would just `clock().now()` not be sufficient, without any additions?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
Posted by "JAkutenshi (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
JAkutenshi commented on code in PR #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029#discussion_r2142295396
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
Review Comment:
Applied.
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
+ // won't be updated if the test will compute too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
Review Comment:
Applied.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
Posted by "JAkutenshi (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
JAkutenshi commented on code in PR #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029#discussion_r2142287401
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
+ // won't be updated if the test will compute too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
+ // given above commit timestamp.
+ clock.update(clock.now().addPhysicalTime(10));
Review Comment:
The reason is the test itself so fast that double now wouldn't change enough for the situation.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] IGNITE-25654 ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest#writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks is flaky [ignite-3]
Posted by "JAkutenshi (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
JAkutenshi commented on code in PR #6029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/6029#discussion_r2142287401
##########
modules/table/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/table/distributed/replication/ZonePartitionReplicaListenerTest.java:
##########
@@ -1466,6 +1464,11 @@ void writeIntentSwitchForCompactedCatalogTimestampWorks(boolean commit) {
HybridTimestamp beginTs = beginTimestamp(txId);
HybridTimestamp commitTs = clock.now();
+ // We have to force push clock forward because we will invoke listener directly bypass ReplicaManager or MessageService, so clock
+ // won't be updated if the test will compute too fast for physical clock ticking and then we may have equal clock#current and the
+ // given above commit timestamp.
+ clock.update(clock.now().addPhysicalTime(10));
Review Comment:
The reason is the test itself so fast that double now won't change enough for the situation.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscribe@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org