Skip to content

Drop the ultra-flaky test for orphaned subscriptions. - #2215

Merged
tseaver merged 1 commit into
googleapis:masterfrom
tseaver:2080-pubsub-drop-flaky-orphan-test
Sep 2, 2016
Merged

Drop the ultra-flaky test for orphaned subscriptions.#2215
tseaver merged 1 commit into
googleapis:masterfrom
tseaver:2080-pubsub-drop-flaky-orphan-test

Conversation

@tseaver

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@tseavertseaver added api: pubsub Issues related to the Pub/Sub API. flaky labels Aug 28, 2016
@googlebotgooglebot added the cla: yes This human has signed the Contributor License Agreement. label Aug 28, 2016
@daspecster

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

In #2080 (comment), you mentioned there are other tests that cover this case?

Otherwise LGTM. I agree we need to get the build green with as few logical gaps in test coverage as possible.

I wonder if we should have some kind of secondary set of system tests? It might be nice to track these kinds of issues for the upstream guys?

@tseaver

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@daspecster Another option would be to mark the test with @unittest.expectedFailure.

@dhermes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

See my comment on #2080. Let's hold off on merging this until we can get @tmatsuo to weigh in (or until a fixed time interval passes not hearing from him)

@tseaver

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@dhermes WDYT of leaving it in place, but decorating it with @unittest.expected_failure? The back-end folks could use to to investigate, and meanwhile we would be green.

@dhermes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Seems mostly OK. But an issue needs to be filed to follow up and fix it.

@tseaver

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

#2080 would stay open if we followed that route: ideally, we would assign it to @tmatsuo.

@dhermes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OK

Allows our tests to go green while the back-end investigates.
Also, drop the ultra-flaky 'self.assertFalse(topic.exists())' in
'test_list_subscriptions'. It is redundant (names are unique), and dropping
it lets the test pass normally.
Toward #2080, #2111.
@tseaver

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

I just backed out the "delete the test" change and marked it with unittest.expectedFailure.

I also dropped the self.assertFalse(topic.exists()) (see #2111).

def test_list_subscriptions(self):
TOPIC_NAME = 'list-sub' + unique_resource_id('-')
topic = Config.CLIENT.topic(TOPIC_NAME)
self.assertFalse(retry_unavailable(topic.exists)())

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

This comment was marked as spam.

@dhermes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Go ahead and merge

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

api: pubsubIssues related to the Pub/Sub API.cla: yesThis human has signed the Contributor License Agreement.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@tseaver@daspecster@dhermes@googlebot