Skip to content

chore: fix a flaky test #9699

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

chore: fix a flaky test #9699

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

cjc7373
Copy link
Contributor

@cjc7373 cjc7373 commented Sep 3, 2025

fixes #9448

@apecloud-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Auto Cherry-pick Instructions

Usage:
  - /nopick: Not auto cherry-pick when PR merged.
  - /pick: release-x.x [release-x.x]: Auto cherry-pick to the specified branch when PR merged.

Example:
  - /nopick
  - /pick release-1.0

@github-actions github-actions bot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines. label Sep 3, 2025
@cjc7373 cjc7373 added the pick-1.0 Auto cherry-pick to release-1.0 when PR merged label Sep 3, 2025
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 3, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 59.69%. Comparing base (605b802) to head (587b223).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
pkg/testutil/apps/common_util.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9699      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   59.60%   59.69%   +0.09%     
==========================================
  Files         551      551              
  Lines       59739    59740       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        35607    35662      +55     
+ Misses      20888    20832      -56     
- Partials     3244     3246       +2
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 59.69% <0.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@cjc7373 cjc7373 marked this pull request as ready for review September 3, 2025 10:46
@cjc7373 cjc7373 requested a review from a team as a code owner September 3, 2025 10:46
zjx20
zjx20 reviewed Sep 4, 2025
View reviewed changes
pkg/testutil/apps/common_util.go
@@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ func ClearResourcesWithRemoveFinalizerOption[T intctrlutil.Object, PT intctrluti
pobj := PT(&obj)
if pobj.GetDeletionTimestamp().IsZero() {
d, _ := json.Marshal(pobj)
panic("expected DeletionTimestamp is not nil, obj: " + string(d))
ginkgo.GinkgoWriter.Printf("Warning: deleted obj's DeletionTimestamp is nil. This may due to an old reconciliation process is not done. obj: %s", string(d))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we remove the panic, nobody will notice or care about the warning. Cases may fail due to the residual resources, which are also flaky and hard to debug.

@leon-inf what's your opinion

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

+1, we shouldn't simply remove the panic here. Regarding the specific issue, we should add a mechanism to coordinate the timing of deleting the component and its sub-resources.

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 can try delete Component object without removing the finalizer, so that we can make sure no component's reconciliation is still in progress.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@zjx20 zjx20 zjx20 left review comments

@leon-inf leon-inf leon-inf left review comments

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
pick-1.0 Auto cherry-pick to release-1.0 when PR merged size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] A flaky test
4 participants
@cjc7373 @apecloud-bot @zjx20 @leon-inf