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

gc: add explicit cases for clear range in randomized tests #101245

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 12, 2023

Conversation

aliher1911
Copy link
Contributor

Previously there was very small chance that clear range requirements are met in randomized gc testing. This commit adds explicit test cases where clear range thresholds set specifically low to ensure test sees different ways of splitting requests into batches.

Release note: None

Touches #98156

@aliher1911 aliher1911 requested a review from a team as a code owner April 11, 2023 19:01
@aliher1911 aliher1911 self-assigned this Apr 11, 2023
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@aliher1911 aliher1911 requested a review from a team April 11, 2023 21:15
@aliher1911
Copy link
Contributor Author

All failures are unrelated tests to the test that this pr adds. 😞

now hlc.Timestamp
ttlSec int32
intentAgeSec int32
clearRangeKeys int64 // Set to 0 for test default value or -1 to disable.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: probably not worth a CI roundtrip, but using the same name clearRangeMinKeys as the actual parameter would be clearer.

Previously there was very small chance that clear range requirements are
met in randomized gc testing. This commit adds explicit test cases where
clear range thresholds set specifically low to ensure test sees different
ways of splitting requests into batches.

Epic: none

Release note: None
@aliher1911 aliher1911 force-pushed the add_randomized_gc_variants branch from 9076b46 to 45c3540 Compare April 12, 2023 10:38
@erikgrinaker erikgrinaker added the backport-23.1.x Flags PRs that need to be backported to 23.1 label Apr 12, 2023
@aliher1911
Copy link
Contributor Author

bors r=erikgrinaker

1 similar comment
@aliher1911
Copy link
Contributor Author

bors r=erikgrinaker

@craig
Copy link
Contributor

craig bot commented Apr 12, 2023

Build succeeded:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport-23.1.x Flags PRs that need to be backported to 23.1
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants