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

clientv3/balancer: enable test again instead of skip. #10579

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

4 participants
@johncming
Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 23, 2019

enable test again instead of skip.

@codecov-io

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 23, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #10579 into master will increase coverage by 0.17%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #10579      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   71.63%   71.81%   +0.17%     
==========================================
  Files         393      393              
  Lines       36568    36568              
==========================================
+ Hits        26195    26260      +65     
+ Misses       8538     8482      -56     
+ Partials     1835     1826       -9
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
etcdctl/ctlv3/command/lease_command.go 65.34% <0%> (-5.95%) ⬇️
etcdserver/api/v3rpc/lease.go 71.59% <0%> (-5.69%) ⬇️
clientv3/concurrency/election.go 79.68% <0%> (-2.35%) ⬇️
clientv3/retry_interceptor.go 68.13% <0%> (-0.99%) ⬇️
etcdserver/api/rafthttp/stream.go 79.39% <0%> (-0.43%) ⬇️
etcdserver/server.go 75.03% <0%> (-0.15%) ⬇️
etcdserver/api/v3rpc/watch.go 82.35% <0%> (+0.32%) ⬆️
mvcc/watchable_store.go 84.56% <0%> (+0.35%) ⬆️
clientv3/watch.go 92.19% <0%> (+0.42%) ⬆️
etcdserver/v3_server.go 80% <0%> (+0.45%) ⬆️
... and 19 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7a5acb4...b709fec. Read the comment docs.

@jingyih

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 23, 2019

Is this unit test part of our CI? Did you try it locally?

@johncming

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Mar 23, 2019

Is this unit test part of our CI? Did you try it locally?

yes. I try locally first, then I try travis ci in my fork repo. Both is ok.

the testcase using fatal is ok.

Is there any other reason to use skip?

Thanks.

@jingyih

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 24, 2019

It is interesting that there is a // TODO: FIX ME. Defer to the original author @gyuho.

@xiang90

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 28, 2019

/cc @gyuho can you take a look?

@jingyih

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 15, 2019

cc @jpbetz

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.