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

Include extra tests for time limits #6

Closed
mmusgrov opened this issue Jun 18, 2018 · 11 comments
Closed

Include extra tests for time limits #6

mmusgrov opened this issue Jun 18, 2018 · 11 comments
Assignees
Labels
PR sent The issue is waiting for its associated PR to be merged TCK The issue relates to the TCK (either a test is missing or a test needs modifying
Milestone

Comments

@mmusgrov
Copy link
Contributor

mmusgrov commented Jun 18, 2018

Add a test for timelimits on LRAs. Check the behaviour for both the LRA.Type.SUPPORTS and
LRA.Type.REQUIRED annotations.

@mmusgrov mmusgrov changed the title Include extra tests for time limits and improve javadoc comments Include extra tests for time limits Oct 5, 2018
@mmusgrov mmusgrov added the 1.0 label Dec 3, 2018
@mmusgrov mmusgrov added this to the 1.0 milestone Dec 5, 2018
@mmusgrov mmusgrov removed 1.0 labels Dec 5, 2018
@rdebusscher
Copy link
Member

Add it to the list of TCK tests, see #92. And then this can be closed.

@mmusgrov
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusgrov commented Mar 7, 2019

If we don't have separate issues for tests where do we discuss the behaviour of the testcase before raising PR's?

@xstefank
Copy link
Member

xstefank commented Mar 7, 2019

@mmusgrov you can discuss it in the issue #92 or on gitter/hangout. #92 should only act as a tracker so if you really feel the need to have a separate discussion in separate issue like this one I don't see any problem with it, just please link this issue as well as PR to the particular line of the test case in #92.

@mmusgrov
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusgrov commented Mar 7, 2019

Putting every discussion on #92 will become very difficult to parse, particularly if more than one TCK test is being discussed.

@xstefank
Copy link
Member

xstefank commented Mar 7, 2019

@mmusgrov ok, you are right, if there is need to discuss some tests then a separate issue should be created. So far the scenarios were pretty necessary and straightforward but we should keep things clear and separated. And use #92 only for tracking purposes.

@mmusgrov
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusgrov commented Mar 7, 2019

For example the first test in #92 just says timelimit and I wanted to check whether there was any overlap with #6 and there is nowhere I can go to find out other than looking at the code.

@xstefank
Copy link
Member

xstefank commented Mar 7, 2019

I believe this particular one was migrated from the sandbox when you first moved the code base. But of course if there is an issue open just link it to the tracker.

@mmusgrov mmusgrov added the TCK The issue relates to the TCK (either a test is missing or a test needs modifying label Jul 15, 2019
@mmusgrov mmusgrov self-assigned this Jul 31, 2019
@rdebusscher
Copy link
Member

Some tests related to #233 to test timeout related stuff.

Test A

Service A - Timeout 1 Hour
Service B - Type.MANDATORY - TimeOut 500 ms
Service A calls Service B

Test calls service A, wait 1 sec, trigger recovery and verifies if LRA is cancelled.

Test B

Service A - Timeout 500 ms
Service B - Type.MANDATORY``
Service A calls Service B after it has waited 1 sec. Service A returns http Status from the call to Service B.

test calls A and verifies if return is status 412 (precondition failed) since LRA is not active when Service B endpoint is called.

@mmusgrov
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also include a test that verifies that the time limit is respected after a system crash. When the system restarts the time limit should become active again. If the time limit has already passed when the system comes back up then the test should check that the compensation callbacks are triggered.

@tomjenkinson
Copy link
Contributor

Also include a test that verifies that the time limit is respected after a system crash. When the system restarts the time limit should become active again. If the time limit has already passed when the system comes back up then the test should verify that the completing the transaction is not possible.

@xstefank xstefank added the PR sent The issue is waiting for its associated PR to be merged label Jan 16, 2020
@mmusgrov
Copy link
Contributor Author

PR merged

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
PR sent The issue is waiting for its associated PR to be merged TCK The issue relates to the TCK (either a test is missing or a test needs modifying
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants