chore(search): Fix expiry test #2136
Conversation
dranikpg
force-pushed
the
search-test-fix
branch
from
5e1440f to
94a5e7b
Compare
| @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ TEST_F(SearchFamilyTest, SimpleExpiry) { | |||
| EXPECT_THAT(Run({"ft.search", "i1", "*"}), AreDocIds("d:1")); | |||
|
|
|||
| Run({"flushall"}); | |||
| EXPECT_EQ(used_mem_current.load(), 0); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apparently the heartbeat has enough time on CI to recompute the memory budget
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand this comment 🙃
And also - why do you now drop the index? Don't you want at least to verify we don't get an error reply?
I guess FLUSHALL shouldn't drop indices, but I just want to make sure that's how it's designed to work?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand this comment 🙃
used_mem_current is always zero, unless the heartbeat does more than 8 iterations and the value is updated. Because the we preallocate some stuff, it goes up immediately. I added this check because it blocked other values from being added
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And also - why do you now drop the index?
It slipped in accidentally when I experimented with this value and I just didn't exclude it... Just removed it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we should be dropping indices on flushall, but just wanted to make sure you agree :)
Anyway, sg.
Signed-off-by: Vladislav Oleshko <[email protected]>
dranikpg
force-pushed
the
search-test-fix
branch
from
94a5e7b to
8eddb29
Compare
| @@ -570,7 +570,7 @@ TEST_F(SearchFamilyTest, SimpleExpiry) { | |||
| EXPECT_THAT(Run({"ft.search", "i1", "*"}), AreDocIds("d:1")); | |||
|
|
|||
| Run({"flushall"}); | |||
| EXPECT_EQ(used_mem_current.load(), 0); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we should be dropping indices on flushall, but just wanted to make sure you agree :)
Anyway, sg.
Trying to run it on CI