Refactor test for remaining group elements after partial removal#462
Merged
eddelbuettel merged 2 commits intomasterfrom Sep 2, 2022
Merged
Refactor test for remaining group elements after partial removal#462eddelbuettel merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
eddelbuettel merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
Conversation
eddelbuettel
requested review from
aaronwolen,
awenocur,
ihnorton and
leipzig
|
This pull request has been linked to Shortcut Story #21158: More robust test setup for group removal. |
awenocur
approved these changes
Sep 1, 2022
Merged
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR makes one (occassionally failing) tests for comparison of groups following removal a little more resilient by comparing against "all" possible values (here: two). The underlying issue may well be that we are "writing too much too fast" without an explicit
sleep()making the timestamp-ordered retrieval undeterminstic. In our different setups the issue was never reliably reproducible, so the more defensive approach in value comparison is appropriate.No new code.