Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
T258401: Stop deleting important objects found in commits #128
T258401: Stop deleting important objects found in commits #128
Changes from 3 commits
487f9e8
409cd59
d6120da
26d382c
7e4b776
31ebf9e
641cbca
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why doesn't this prevent the deletion of
/some_module/acl_users
in recursive mode? I'm a bit confused...There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it does prevent it, but the test does not notice because of some transaction shenanigans. I stepped with the debugger into the
playback
and noticed that bothfs_contents
andsrv_contents
were empty, so nothing was deleted. Not sure why the first check for the presence ofacl_users
in the tests does not fail though...There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To explain: If we simply manipulate something with directly accessing
self.app
, this automatically opens a transaction. When the nextself.run(...)
is executed, this usually also starts a transaction, aborting the already open transaction. Therefore the creation of/some_module
and/some_module/acl_users
was never commited, but visible in the first check (since it was still the same transaction), but no longer visible once theplayback
started.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess
playback
explicitly starts a new transaction (to be able to roll it back later) whilerecord
does not (because it does not expect to change anything inside the Data.FS).