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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Add test in banking stage for recording txs in last tick #34635
Add test in banking stage for recording txs in last tick #34635
Changes from all commits
de70de9
6c32917
c178593
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
This block is covering most of the test body.
Is it because you want the
blockstore
to be destructed before thecall?
While generally blocks are a better way to scope object lifetimes, when they are this long, it becomes harder to track the dependencies.
Maybe remove it and add an explicit
drop()
just before thedestroy()
call: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.
While this function is very important to this test, it does not have direct dependencies on the test content.
In other words, it can be moved to the module level, and be a helper function, similar to the
store_nonce_account()
.Doing so, I think, could make the test shorter and, potentially, easier to read.
If you want to keep it internal to the test, it can also be moved outside the block that constraints the lifetime of the
blockstore
.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.
minor
Would it make sense to lock the
poh_recorder
only once?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.
Normally yes, but given this is test code, I passed on this
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.
minor
While it is unlikely that this will fail, could the error message contain any useful information?
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.
minor
Using
assert_eq!
would show the error content in case of a failure:Or, if the successful result is more complex:
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.