Test cleanup including being less sensitive to single-host span storage #1658
Conversation
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
| @@ -72,7 +72,6 @@ | |||
| .addAnnotation(Annotation.create((TODAY + 150) * 1000, CLIENT_SEND, APP_ENDPOINT)) | |||
| .addAnnotation(Annotation.create((TODAY + 200) * 1000, CLIENT_RECV, APP_ENDPOINT)) | |||
| .addAnnotation(Annotation.create((TODAY + 190) * 1000, "⻩", NO_IP_ENDPOINT)) | |||
| .addBinaryAnnotation(BinaryAnnotation.address(CLIENT_ADDR, APP_ENDPOINT)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is invalid to put a CLIENT_ADDR on a client span. Scrubbed this as it confuses other things
| @@ -144,14 +144,12 @@ public void evict_detailed() { | |||
|
|
|||
| @Test | |||
| public void evict_oneTraceMultipleSpans() { | |||
| Span testSpan1 = span1.toBuilder().traceIdHigh(1L).traceId(123). | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test was accidentally testing defaults related to ignoring traceIdHigh.
| @@ -519,11 +520,11 @@ public void getTraces_differentiateOnServiceName() { | |||
|
|
|||
| Span trace2 = Span.builder().traceId(2).name("get").id(2) | |||
| .timestamp((today + 2) * 1000) | |||
| .addAnnotation(Annotation.create((today + 1) * 1000, CLIENT_SEND, APP_ENDPOINT)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this data had incorrectly aligned timestamps (which wasn't the point of the test)
| .map(a -> Annotation.create(a.timestamp + i, a.value, a.endpoint)) | ||
| .collect(toList())) | ||
| .build(); | ||
| trace[i + 1] = Span.builder().traceId(trace[0].traceId).parentId(trace[0].id).id(i).name("") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this test is also testing "raw spans". To make sure this passes, we should make a span which has no authoritative timestamp (client spans do have an authoritative timestamp and that was the prior test data)
codefromthecrypt
force-pushed
the
less-sensitive-test
branch
from
cdb4439 to
dc668e6
Compare
codefromthecrypt
changed the title
There were tests accidentally assuming merge semantics when testing unrelated things. This scrubs some of the tests to focus on what they are testing, and in doing so help pave forward single-host span storage.
codefromthecrypt
force-pushed
the
less-sensitive-test
branch
from
dc668e6 to
92d2dec
Compare
abesto
pushed a commit
to abesto/zipkin
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 10, 2019
…ge (openzipkin#1658) There were tests accidentally assuming merge semantics when testing unrelated things. This scrubs some of the tests to focus on what they are testing, and in doing so help pave forward single-host span storage.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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 were tests accidentally assuming merge semantics when testing
unrelated things. This scrubs some of the tests to focus on what they
are testing, and in doing so help pave forward single-host span storage.
See #1644