-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24.9k
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
update ILM integ test cluster poll interval to 1s #35113
Conversation
Pinging @elastic/es-core-infra |
test this please |
1 similar comment
test this please |
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.
Overall looks good, I think we should document why the order is the way it is if the order matters to timing though.
assertBusy(() -> assertFalse(indexExists(originalIndex))); | ||
assertBusy(() -> assertFalse(indexExists(shrunkenOriginalIndex))); |
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.
If the order of these asserts is important in a non-obvious way, we should probably include a comment explaining why.
assertBusy(() -> assertFalse(indexExists(originalIndex))); | ||
assertBusy(() -> assertFalse(indexExists(shrunkenOriginalIndex))); |
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.
If the order of these asserts is important in a non-obvious way, we should probably include a comment explaining why.
thank you @gwbrown, I've updated with docs! |
While those docs are good, what I meant was something more like:
Sorry I wasn't clear! |
thank you @gwbrown. added in the extra context you mentioned about ordering |
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.
Looks good, thanks!
To test a theory for #35105, I am opening this
to see how it behaves in CI.
More logging is also necessary to see how to resolve this consistently, beyond timing magic.