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

jobs.v3.api_client.auto_complete_sample_test: test_auto_complete_sample failed #2945

Closed
flaky-bot bot opened this issue Feb 20, 2020 · 5 comments · Fixed by #3278
Closed

jobs.v3.api_client.auto_complete_sample_test: test_auto_complete_sample failed #2945

flaky-bot bot opened this issue Feb 20, 2020 · 5 comments · Fixed by #3278
Assignees
Labels
api: talent priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns.

Comments

@flaky-bot
Copy link

flaky-bot bot commented Feb 20, 2020

jobs.v3.api_client.auto_complete_sample_test: test_auto_complete_sample failed
buildID: 0715f7d
buildURL: Build Status, Sponge
status: failed

@flaky-bot flaky-bot bot added buildcop: issue priority: p1 Important issue which blocks shipping the next release. Will be fixed prior to next release. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns. labels Feb 20, 2020
@flaky-bot
Copy link
Author

flaky-bot bot commented Feb 20, 2020

Closing as a duplicate of #2944

1 similar comment
@flaky-bot
Copy link
Author

flaky-bot bot commented Feb 20, 2020

Closing as a duplicate of #2944

@flaky-bot flaky-bot bot closed this as completed Feb 20, 2020
@flaky-bot flaky-bot bot reopened this Feb 24, 2020
@flaky-bot
Copy link
Author

flaky-bot bot commented Feb 24, 2020

Looks like this issue is flaky. 😟

I'm going to leave this open and stop commenting.

A human should fix and close this.

jobs.v3.api_client.auto_complete_sample_test: test_auto_complete_sample failed
buildID: [TODO: set buildID]
buildURL: Build Status, Sponge
status: failed

@busunkim96 busunkim96 removed their assignment Feb 27, 2020
@yoshi-automation yoshi-automation added the 🚨 This issue needs some love. label Feb 27, 2020
@crwilcox crwilcox added priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. and removed priority: p1 Important issue which blocks shipping the next release. Will be fixed prior to next release. labels Mar 4, 2020
@yoshi-automation yoshi-automation removed the 🚨 This issue needs some love. label Mar 4, 2020
@tmatsuo tmatsuo self-assigned this Apr 2, 2020
@tmatsuo
Copy link
Contributor

tmatsuo commented Apr 3, 2020

I was able to run the tests. They all passed. I think I'll need to scrutiny the test code to find why it's flaky.

@tmatsuo
Copy link
Contributor

tmatsuo commented Apr 3, 2020

Ouch. In the sample code, I found the following:

    # Wait several seconds for post processing                                                                                                                    
    time.sleep(10)

tmatsuo pushed a commit to tmatsuo/python-docs-samples that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2020
fixes GoogleCloudPlatform#2945
fixes GoogleCloudPlatform#2818

There were 8 tests which has `time.sleep(10)` for waiting data
propagation or whatever. I chose to use `@eventually_consistent.call`
instead of sleep in those tests.

Bonus point is now the tests are significantly faster because it doesn't
always wait for 10 seconds.

The downside is it will take a long time on failure. We may want to
specify the retry count on the eventualy consistent decorator once the
following issue is fixed:

GoogleCloudPlatform/python-repo-tools#25
tmatsuo pushed a commit to tmatsuo/python-docs-samples that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2020
fixes GoogleCloudPlatform#2945
fixes GoogleCloudPlatform#2818

There were 8 tests which has `time.sleep(10)` for waiting data
propagation or whatever. I chose to use `@eventually_consistent.call`
instead of sleep in those tests.

Bonus point is now the tests are significantly faster because it doesn't
always wait for 10 seconds.

The downside is it will take a long time on failure. We may want to
specify the retry count on the eventualy consistent decorator once the
following issue is fixed:

GoogleCloudPlatform/python-repo-tools#25
tmatsuo pushed a commit to tmatsuo/python-docs-samples that referenced this issue Apr 3, 2020
fixes GoogleCloudPlatform#2945
fixes GoogleCloudPlatform#2818

There were 8 tests which has `time.sleep(10)` for waiting data
propagation or whatever. I chose to use `@eventually_consistent.call`
instead of sleep in those tests.

Bonus point is now the tests are significantly faster because it doesn't
always wait for 10 seconds.

The downside is it will take a long time on failure. We may want to
specify the retry count on the eventualy consistent decorator once the
following issue is fixed:

GoogleCloudPlatform/python-repo-tools#25
tmatsuo pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 7, 2020
* [jobs] testing: reduce test flakiness

fixes #2945
fixes #2818

There were 8 tests which has `time.sleep(10)` for waiting data
propagation or whatever. I chose to use `@eventually_consistent.call`
instead of sleep in those tests.

Bonus point is now the tests are significantly faster because it doesn't
always wait for 10 seconds.

The downside is it will take a long time on failure. We may want to
specify the retry count on the eventualy consistent decorator once the
following issue is fixed:

GoogleCloudPlatform/python-repo-tools#25

* style fix
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
api: talent priority: p2 Moderately-important priority. Fix may not be included in next release. type: bug Error or flaw in code with unintended results or allowing sub-optimal usage patterns.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants