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

e2e: fix flakiness in dynamic-pools test03-rebalancing #1063

Closed

Conversation

askervin
Copy link
Contributor

Optimize verifications, make first verifications quickly without long stabilizing periods, retry if needed.

Optimize verifications, make first verifications quickly without long
stabilizing periods, retry if needed.
verify 'len(cpus["pod2c0"]) > len(cpus["pod0c0"])'
verify 'len(cpus["pod2c0"]) > len(cpus["pod1c0"])'
verify 'len(cpus["pod0c0"]) + len(cpus["pod1c0"]) + len(cpus["pod2c0"]) == 14'
retry 10 verify \
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@askervin @marquiz #1067 adds an implicit unparametrized builtin retry to verify. We need to chose whether we go with that, and make it configurable if needed, or with this.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd rather change this into verify --retry 10 ... on top of PR #1069.

Copy link
Contributor

@klihub klihub Aug 25, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree and suggested an alternative in #1067.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd rather change this into verify --retry 10 ... on top of PR #1069.

OK, if we need 10 retries here then maybe #1069 would be the way to go

@askervin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this PR, because PR #1069 brings in automatic retries in verify.

@askervin askervin closed this Aug 25, 2023
@marquiz
Copy link
Contributor

marquiz commented Aug 25, 2023

Closing this PR, because PR #1069 brings in automatic retries in verify.

Is the three times from there enough? We can wait an see if any issues regarding this arise

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants