This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 23, 2023. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.9k
add instrumentation for intermittent DNS failures #34934
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -35,7 +35,6 @@ public void TryGetAddrInfo_LocalHost() | |
Assert.NotNull(hostEntry.Aliases); | ||
} | ||
|
||
[ConditionalFact(typeof(PlatformDetection), nameof(PlatformDetection.IsNotArm64Process))] // [ActiveIssue(32797)] | ||
public void TryGetAddrInfo_HostName() | ||
{ | ||
string hostName = NameResolutionPal.GetHostName(); | ||
|
@@ -50,6 +49,16 @@ public void TryGetAddrInfo_HostName() | |
// machine configurations, which varies by distro and is often inconsistent. | ||
return; | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Temporary instrumentation for #32797 | ||
if (error == SocketError.TryAgain && Environment.OSVersion.Platform == PlatformID.Unix) | ||
{ | ||
error = NameResolutionPal.TryGetAddrInfo(hostName, out hostEntry, out nativeErrorCode); | ||
if (error != SocketError.TryAgain) | ||
wfurt marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
{ | ||
throw new InvalidOperationException("Name resolution failure preventable with retry"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
Assert.Equal(SocketError.Success, error); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The test just failed again at this assert, meaning the retry didn't help, at least not in that case: There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. |
||
Assert.NotNull(hostEntry); | ||
|
@@ -92,7 +101,6 @@ public void TryGetAddrInfo_LocalHost_TryGetNameInfo() | |
Assert.NotNull(name); | ||
} | ||
|
||
[ConditionalFact(typeof(PlatformDetection), nameof(PlatformDetection.IsNotArm64Process))] // [ActiveIssue(32797)] | ||
public void TryGetAddrInfo_HostName_TryGetNameInfo() | ||
{ | ||
string hostName = NameResolutionPal.GetHostName(); | ||
|
@@ -109,6 +117,16 @@ public void TryGetAddrInfo_HostName_TryGetNameInfo() | |
return; | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Temporary instrumentation for #32797 | ||
if (error == SocketError.TryAgain && Environment.OSVersion.Platform == PlatformID.Unix) | ||
{ | ||
error = NameResolutionPal.TryGetAddrInfo(hostName, out hostEntry, out nativeErrorCode); | ||
if (error != SocketError.TryAgain) | ||
wfurt marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
{ | ||
throw new InvalidOperationException("Name resolution failure preventable with retry"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
Assert.Equal(SocketError.Success, error); | ||
Assert.NotNull(hostEntry); | ||
|
||
|
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.
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.
This is a test case inside a test project, we need [Fact]/[Theory] label to run the test. Here seems we remove the [ConditionalFact] without adding a new [Fact] label, and I don't think the test will actually run - or this is intentional? not running the test?
cc: @davidsh
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 agree. And there is another test in this file also that now no longer runs. It needs to be changed to "[Fact]" as well.