New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[FLINK-18247][table-planner-blink] Fix unstable test: TableITCase.testCollectWithClose #12595
Conversation
…tCollectWithClose
Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community Automated ChecksLast check on commit 9e43454 (Thu Jun 11 07:54:12 UTC 2020) Warnings:
Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks. Review Progress
Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process. The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commandsThe @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
|
} catch { | ||
// ignore the exception, | ||
// because the MiniCluster maybe already been shut down when getting job status | ||
case _: Throwable => None |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This also catch exception of assertNotEquals
and makes assertNotEquals
useless.
This reverts commit e32a32b
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me.
What is the purpose of the change
The reason is after calling CloseableIterator#close to cancel job in TableITCase.testCollectWithClose method, the job status may be CANCELED, CANCELING or even the MiniCluster maybe already been shut down. An exception will be thrown when MiniCluster is down. This pr aims to fix the unstable case.
Brief change log
Verifying this change
This change is already covered by existing tests.
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
@Public(Evolving)
: (yes / no)Documentation