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

Re-enable ignored simtests #8735

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2023
Merged

Re-enable ignored simtests #8735

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2023

Conversation

sadhansood
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Describe the changes or additions included in this PR.

Test Plan

How did you test the new or updated feature?


If your changes are not user-facing and not a breaking change, you can skip the following section. Otherwise, please indicate what changed, and then add to the Release Notes section as highlighted during the release process.

Type of Change (Check all that apply)

  • user-visible impact
  • breaking change for a client SDKs
  • breaking change for FNs (FN binary must upgrade)
  • breaking change for validators or node operators (must upgrade binaries)
  • breaking change for on-chain data layout
  • necessitate either a data wipe or data migration

Release notes

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Mar 1, 2023

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

3 Ignored Deployments
Name Status Preview Comments Updated
explorer ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Mar 1, 2023 at 5:33AM (UTC)
explorer-storybook ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Mar 1, 2023 at 5:33AM (UTC)
wallet-adapter ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Mar 1, 2023 at 5:33AM (UTC)

@sadhansood sadhansood force-pushed the sadhan/fix_simtests branch 2 times, most recently from afbfc7b to de2a9b5 Compare March 1, 2023 02:04
@@ -264,6 +264,9 @@ impl ValidatorProxy for LocalValidatorAggregatorProxy {
}

async fn execute_transaction(&self, tx: Transaction) -> anyhow::Result<ExecutionEffects> {
if std::env::var("BENCH_MODE").is_ok() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So does this require BENCH_MODE to be set outside of simtests? Maybe instead we can run execute_transaction() only in tests and simtests?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, this change explicitly wants the user to set BENCH_MODE if they want to use execute_bench_transaction() which does not handle epoch changes like the quorum driver. So, the default behavior is favoring correctness (without the env variable set) and allows user to switch to more performant code path if they want to.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For instance I encountered this locally that stress client started failing after epoch change when i used a small epoch duration

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is good point. I think this gets into the debate for whether stress client is intended for benchmarking or generating transactions load. If we require users to set BENCH_MODE, I think @asonnino should be aware so he can add the flag when running tests. Also we need to add the flag when running stress client in sui-operations.

Copy link
Member

@mwtian mwtian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Otherwise I think falling back to quorum driver in simtest is a good approach!

@@ -68,7 +67,6 @@ mod test {
}

#[sim_test(config = "test_config()")]
#[ignore]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the ignores that don't have the long comments should actually be left in place. these tests work but are not stable enough to run in CI.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this still unstable after fixing the Narwhal issue?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ok, i will put those back

@sadhansood sadhansood force-pushed the sadhan/fix_simtests branch from de2a9b5 to e2da9a6 Compare March 1, 2023 03:23
Copy link
Member

@mwtian mwtian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rebase should fix lint.

@sadhansood sadhansood force-pushed the sadhan/fix_simtests branch from e2da9a6 to a71a79f Compare March 1, 2023 05:33
@sadhansood sadhansood merged commit 558774f into main Mar 1, 2023
@sadhansood sadhansood deleted the sadhan/fix_simtests branch March 1, 2023 06:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants