-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 463
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
feat(test_runner): allowed_errors in storage scrubber #10062
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <[email protected]>
7062 tests run: 6747 passed, 0 failed, 315 skipped (full report)Flaky tests (4)Postgres 17
Postgres 15
Postgres 14
Code coverage* (full report)
* collected from Rust tests only The comment gets automatically updated with the latest test results
3ee2bd3 at 2024-12-10T16:26:30.108Z :recycle: |
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <[email protected]>
5689d07
to
86b92fa
Compare
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <[email protected]>
86b92fa
to
457935f
Compare
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <[email protected]>
564d844
to
d1e4d76
Compare
Next step: figure out which test cases would produce orphan layers and allow such errors for these test cases. We can also choose to add it to default allowed errors. |
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.
LGTM. I think we discussed the disable_scrub_on_exit
method in the meeting. I think currently it is used for two cases:
- We deleted the only tenant, and the scrubber fails if it detects nothing.
- Immediate shutdown might left orphan layers.
As a next step, we potentially could add those to structured allowed errors and remove disable_scrub_on_exit
if that's desired. I don't have strong opinion on this.
Signed-off-by: Alex Chi Z <[email protected]>
6a96956
to
3ee2bd3
Compare
Problem
resolve #9988 (comment)
Summary of changes