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

Fix flaky Jest test on generateVulnerabilitiesRuleQuery #195681

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 10, 2024

Conversation

opauloh
Copy link
Contributor

@opauloh opauloh commented Oct 9, 2024

Summary

It fixes the flaky test raised on #195634 by adding the possibility to pass the timestamp to the function. That helps to eliminate flakiness, by passing the same currentTimestamp to both the test and the function. Also, it's a simpler approach that doesn't require mocking global objects or using Jest's fake timers, keeping your test straightforward and easy to understand.

@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/kibana-cloud-security-posture (Team:Cloud Security)

@opauloh opauloh added v9.0.0 v8.16.0 backport:version Backport to applied version labels release_note:skip Skip the PR/issue when compiling release notes labels Oct 9, 2024
@opauloh opauloh enabled auto-merge (squash) October 9, 2024 21:35
@opauloh opauloh changed the title fix flaky test with timestamp Fix flaky Jest test on generateVulnerabilitiesRuleQuery Oct 9, 2024
@opauloh opauloh merged commit b51ba0a into elastic:main Oct 10, 2024
20 checks passed
@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor

Starting backport for target branches: 8.x

https://github.com/elastic/kibana/actions/runs/11265278151

@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

💚 Build Succeeded

Metrics [docs]

Async chunks

Total size of all lazy-loaded chunks that will be downloaded as the user navigates the app

id before after diff
cloudSecurityPosture 506.3KB 506.3KB -12.0B

kibanamachine pushed a commit to kibanamachine/kibana that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2024
## Summary

It fixes the flaky test raised on elastic#195634 by adding the possibility to
pass the timestamp to the function. That helps to eliminate flakiness,
by passing the same `currentTimestamp` to both the test and the
function. Also, it's a simpler approach that doesn't require mocking
global objects or using Jest's fake timers, keeping your test
straightforward and easy to understand.

(cherry picked from commit b51ba0a)
@kibanamachine
Copy link
Contributor

💚 All backports created successfully

Status Branch Result
8.x

Note: Successful backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI.

Questions ?

Please refer to the Backport tool documentation

kibanamachine added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2024
# Backport

This will backport the following commits from `main` to `8.x`:
- [fix flaky test with timestamp
(#195681)](#195681)

<!--- Backport version: 9.4.3 -->

### Questions ?
Please refer to the [Backport tool
documentation](https://github.com/sqren/backport)

<!--BACKPORT [{"author":{"name":"Paulo
Silva","email":"[email protected]"},"sourceCommit":{"committedDate":"2024-10-10T00:36:33Z","message":"fix
flaky test with timestamp (#195681)\n\n## Summary\r\n\r\nIt fixes the
flaky test raised on #195634 by adding the possibility to\r\npass the
timestamp to the function. That helps to eliminate flakiness,\r\nby
passing the same `currentTimestamp` to both the test and
the\r\nfunction. Also, it's a simpler approach that doesn't require
mocking\r\nglobal objects or using Jest's fake timers, keeping your
test\r\nstraightforward and easy to
understand.","sha":"b51ba0a27c852f967b922130d01ac7cf2ec11d64","branchLabelMapping":{"^v9.0.0$":"main","^v8.16.0$":"8.x","^v(\\d+).(\\d+).\\d+$":"$1.$2"}},"sourcePullRequest":{"labels":["release_note:skip","v9.0.0","Team:Cloud
Security","v8.16.0","backport:version"],"title":"Fix flaky Jest test on
generateVulnerabilitiesRuleQuery","number":195681,"url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/195681","mergeCommit":{"message":"fix
flaky test with timestamp (#195681)\n\n## Summary\r\n\r\nIt fixes the
flaky test raised on #195634 by adding the possibility to\r\npass the
timestamp to the function. That helps to eliminate flakiness,\r\nby
passing the same `currentTimestamp` to both the test and
the\r\nfunction. Also, it's a simpler approach that doesn't require
mocking\r\nglobal objects or using Jest's fake timers, keeping your
test\r\nstraightforward and easy to
understand.","sha":"b51ba0a27c852f967b922130d01ac7cf2ec11d64"}},"sourceBranch":"main","suggestedTargetBranches":["8.x"],"targetPullRequestStates":[{"branch":"main","label":"v9.0.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v9.0.0$","isSourceBranch":true,"state":"MERGED","url":"https://github.com/elastic/kibana/pull/195681","number":195681,"mergeCommit":{"message":"fix
flaky test with timestamp (#195681)\n\n## Summary\r\n\r\nIt fixes the
flaky test raised on #195634 by adding the possibility to\r\npass the
timestamp to the function. That helps to eliminate flakiness,\r\nby
passing the same `currentTimestamp` to both the test and
the\r\nfunction. Also, it's a simpler approach that doesn't require
mocking\r\nglobal objects or using Jest's fake timers, keeping your
test\r\nstraightforward and easy to
understand.","sha":"b51ba0a27c852f967b922130d01ac7cf2ec11d64"}},{"branch":"8.x","label":"v8.16.0","branchLabelMappingKey":"^v8.16.0$","isSourceBranch":false,"state":"NOT_CREATED"}]}]
BACKPORT-->

Co-authored-by: Paulo Silva <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport:version Backport to applied version labels release_note:skip Skip the PR/issue when compiling release notes Team:Cloud Security Cloud Security team related v8.16.0 v9.0.0
Projects
None yet
4 participants