Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
test: Add test for piping large input from stdin - #5949
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just out of curiosity, is there any significance to this number? Will this reproduce the issue on all operating systems?
cjihrig
commented
Mar 29, 2016
LGTM with a question. |
addaleax
commented
Mar 29, 2016
@cjihrig Answering your questions outside of the diff since more people might ask themselves that: I think any input size above 65536 bytes works, but when adding an additional listener via I can only verify that this test works on Linux. But as far as I can tell, the underlying issue depended solely on the relative timing of |
Check that piping a large chunk of data from `process.stdin` into `process.stdout` does not lose any data by verifying that the output has the same size as the input. This is a regression test for nodejs#5927 and fails for the commits in the range [ace1009..89abe86).
f13bddb to
08214baCompareaddaleax
commented
Mar 29, 2016
Updated with your suggestion. |
evanlucas
commented
Mar 29, 2016
mcollina
commented
Mar 30, 2016
LGTM |
bnoordhuis
commented
Mar 30, 2016
LGTM and thanks, landed in 761787b. |
Check that piping a large chunk of data from `process.stdin` into `process.stdout` does not lose any data by verifying that the output has the same size as the input. This is a regression test for #5927 and fails for the commits in the range [ace1009..89abe86). PR-URL: #5949 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
jasnell
commented
Mar 30, 2016
@thealphanerd @nodejs/lts ... while this test may not be entirely applicable to v4 but it may still be worth having. |
Fishrock123
commented
Mar 30, 2016
Should probably go onto lts so we can catch anything similar there |
MylesBorins
commented
Mar 30, 2016
@jasnell +1 |
Check that piping a large chunk of data from `process.stdin` into `process.stdout` does not lose any data by verifying that the output has the same size as the input. This is a regression test for #5927 and fails for the commits in the range [ace1009..89abe86). PR-URL: #5949 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
Check that piping a large chunk of data from `process.stdin` into `process.stdout` does not lose any data by verifying that the output has the same size as the input. This is a regression test for #5927 and fails for the commits in the range [ace1009..89abe86). PR-URL: #5949 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
Check that piping a large chunk of data from `process.stdin` into `process.stdout` does not lose any data by verifying that the output has the same size as the input. This is a regression test for #5927 and fails for the commits in the range [ace1009..89abe86). PR-URL: #5949 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
MylesBorins
commented
Apr 11, 2016
Landed in |
Pull Request check-list
make -j8 test(UNIX) orvcbuild test nosign(Windows) pass withthis change (including linting)?
test (or a benchmark) included? (This is a regression test)
Affected core subsystem(s)
test
Description of change
Check that piping a large chunk of data from
process.stdinintoprocess.stdoutdoes not lose any data by verifying that the output has the same size as the input.This is a regression test for #5927 and fails for the commits in the range [ace1009..89abe86).