-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
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
ext_proc: gcc test flakes: IpVersionsClientTypeDeferredProcessing/ExtProcIntegrationTest.GetAndSetTrailersIncorrectlyOnResponse/IPv6_GoogleGrpc_NoDeferredProcessing #33017
Comments
Response timeouts. This test is flaky. Retest should be able to get the CI pass. Overall, ext_proc_integration_test.cc is growing too big. We probably should start to convert some of the test cases to unit test and move them to filter_test.cc. @tyxia @stevenzzzz |
We should not consider this state to be acceptable. We should use simulated time in tests, where possible, to make tests not be brittle to time. If that is impossible we should allow much more generous timeouts. |
I am thinking we probably can first try to use timeout value larger than Regarding converting to unit test. I personally like integration test (and over unit test :)), as it tests the code in a closer-to-production and more E2E way. If we have concern with its size, we probably can refactor it into multiple integration test. |
ext_proc has side stream process which adds round trip latency for a request. This probably is the reason why these ext_proc tests are frequently flaky due to timeout. As a first remedy, we can certainly increase the timeout to reduce the probability of the flakiness Long term, for tests only need to verify ext_proc filter behavior/state machine, actually filter_test.cc: one example,
|
@tyxia yes, integration tests is end-to-end and close to production. The draw back is it has to create an Envoy instance, which is slow and expensive for tests not necessarily need it. |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the last 30 days. It will be closed in the next 7 days unless it is tagged "help wanted" or "no stalebot" or other activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
This issue has been automatically closed because it has not had activity in the last 37 days. If this issue is still valid, please ping a maintainer and ask them to label it as "help wanted" or "no stalebot". Thank you for your contributions. |
This flaked for me in a CI: https://dev.azure.com/cncf/envoy/_build/results?buildId=165561&view=logs&j=8bf29878-a4cc-50f7-4e84-2255e6fd4065&t=150a3762-112b-5713-0d28-af1eb6c2fbf4
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: