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

Add wait.ExecStrategy to wait on cmd exec in a container #368

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 3, 2021
Merged

Add wait.ExecStrategy to wait on cmd exec in a container #368

merged 2 commits into from
Dec 3, 2021

Conversation

alexey-medvedchikov
Copy link
Contributor

The work is heavily based on wait.HttpStrategy.

This is especially useful with localstack/localstack as the readiness of the HTTP API doesn't actually mean anything, you can still get HTTP 500 on request while checking with some kind of client (or a script) with complete logic can give one confident result.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 23, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #368 (05f3d42) into master (1b9fe0b) will increase coverage by 0.51%.
The diff coverage is 92.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #368      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.66%   63.17%   +0.51%     
==========================================
  Files          15       16       +1     
  Lines        1015     1040      +25     
==========================================
+ Hits          636      657      +21     
- Misses        280      284       +4     
  Partials       99       99              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
wait/exec.go 92.00% <92.00%> (ø)
docker.go 65.42% <0.00%> (-0.83%) ⬇️
wait/http.go 61.45% <0.00%> (+2.08%) ⬆️

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 1b9fe0b...05f3d42. Read the comment docs.

@mdelapenya
Copy link
Collaborator

Hey @alexey-medvedchikov, sorry for the delay in the response, and thanks for this new wait strategy.

I've reviewed and I do not see anything weird. I already approved the GH action run, so let's check how it finishes 🤞

@alexey-medvedchikov
Copy link
Contributor Author

alexey-medvedchikov commented Dec 2, 2021

@mdelapenya Pleasure for me to contribute. I implemented this strategy in the code of our project, and it is really nice to have the possibility to make our own, nice API! Hope to see this in the next version to cut some code of ours. 👍

@mdelapenya mdelapenya added the feature New functionality or new behaviors on the existing one label Dec 3, 2021
@mdelapenya mdelapenya self-assigned this Dec 3, 2021
@mdelapenya mdelapenya merged commit 79476d7 into testcontainers:master Dec 3, 2021
@mdelapenya
Copy link
Collaborator

Merged, thanks!

@dlsrb6342
Copy link
Contributor

@mdelapenya
When will this feature released?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature New functionality or new behaviors on the existing one
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants