Skip to content
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

ProcessingScheduleServiceTest.shouldScheduleOnFixedRate is flaky #10745

Closed
lenaschoenburg opened this issue Oct 18, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #10746
Closed

ProcessingScheduleServiceTest.shouldScheduleOnFixedRate is flaky #10745

lenaschoenburg opened this issue Oct 18, 2022 · 0 comments · Fixed by #10746
Assignees
Labels
kind/flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flaky test version:8.1.3 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.1.3 version:8.2.0-alpha1 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.2.0-alpha1 version:8.2.0 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.2.0

Comments

@lenaschoenburg
Copy link
Member

Summary

Try to answer the following as best as possible

  • How often does the test fail? Twice in the last two days
  • Does it block your work? No
  • Do we suspect that it is a real failure? No

Failures

Outline known failure cases, e.g. a failed assertion and its stacktrace obtained from Jenkins

Example assertion failure
Warning:  Flakes: 
Warning:  io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceTest.shouldScheduleOnFixedRate
Error:    Run 1: ProcessingScheduleServiceTest.shouldScheduleOnFixedRate:291 
dummyTask.execute();
Wanted 5 times:
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceTest$DummyTask.execute(ProcessingScheduleServiceTest.java:383)
But was 145 times:
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)
-> at io.camunda.zeebe.streamprocessor.ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.lambda$runAtFixedRate$1(ProcessingScheduleServiceImpl.java:65)

Hypotheses

If the test thread is blocked (e.g. by gc), the task can be executed more than 5 times. The verification is too strict.

@lenaschoenburg lenaschoenburg added the kind/flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flaky test label Oct 18, 2022
@lenaschoenburg lenaschoenburg self-assigned this Oct 18, 2022
zeebe-bors-camunda bot added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 18, 2022
10750: [Backport stable/8.1] test: don't fail test if scheduled task runs more often than expected r=oleschoenburg a=backport-action

# Description
Backport of #10746 to `stable/8.1`.

relates to #10745

Co-authored-by: Ole Schönburg <ole.schoenburg@gmail.com>
@korthout korthout added version:8.2.0-alpha1 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.2.0-alpha1 version:8.1.3 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.1.3 labels Nov 1, 2022
@npepinpe npepinpe added the version:8.2.0 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.2.0 label Apr 5, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flaky test version:8.1.3 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.1.3 version:8.2.0-alpha1 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.2.0-alpha1 version:8.2.0 Marks an issue as being completely or in parts released in 8.2.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants