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

Fixes flaky metrics unit tests #1731

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 11, 2019

Conversation

hrishin
Copy link
Member

@hrishin hrishin commented Dec 11, 2019

Changes

Quite often unit test failure showing "*** a different view
with the same name is already registered" messages at many places.
At the beginning of every metrics test, it tries to register respective
metrics views(metrics data it want present), publish metrics and
uniregister views. Uniregister view is important becuase for next
test it dont need to hold the old metrics data.
unregister() views were getting called using defer in
table test for loop, just like
for _, td := range tests {
defer unregister()
.......
}
This were resulting unwanted execution behaviour
for unregister() views function, which umtimately faling tests.
Its better to unregister() views before start executing the
tests.

This patch fixes the behaviour by calling uniregister() views function
at the end of loop.

Fixes #1659

Submitter Checklist

These are the criteria that every PR should meet, please check them off as you
review them:

See the contribution guide for more details.

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes Trying to make the CLA bot happy with ppl from different companies work on one commit label Dec 11, 2019
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Dec 11, 2019
@imjasonh
Copy link
Member

/assign

@hrishin
Copy link
Member Author

hrishin commented Dec 11, 2019

/retest

@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

@hrishin you go gofmted

I1211 09:37:18.161] -------------------------------------------
I1211 09:37:18.161] ---- Checking go code style with gofmt ----
I1211 09:37:18.161] -------------------------------------------
I1211 09:37:18.698] diff -u pkg/reconciler/taskrun/metrics_test.go.orig pkg/reconciler/taskrun/metrics_test.go
I1211 09:37:18.698] --- pkg/reconciler/taskrun/metrics_test.go.orig	2019-12-11 09:37:18.432424121 +0000
I1211 09:37:18.698] +++ pkg/reconciler/taskrun/metrics_test.go	2019-12-11 09:37:18.432424121 +0000
I1211 09:37:18.698] @@ -308,4 +308,3 @@
I1211 09:37:18.699]  func unregisterMetrics() {
I1211 09:37:18.699]  	metricstest.Unregister("taskrun_duration_seconds", "pipelinerun_taskrun_duration_seconds", "taskrun_count", "running_taskruns_count", "taskruns_pod_latency")
I1211 09:37:18.699]  }
I1211 09:37:18.699] -

@hrishin
Copy link
Member Author

hrishin commented Dec 11, 2019

@vdemeester ohh yeah, thank you :). (need to align tooling on on dev machine)

@hrishin hrishin changed the title Fixes broken metrics unit tests Fixes flaky metrics unit tests Dec 11, 2019
Copy link
Member

@imjasonh imjasonh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 11, 2019
Quite often unit test failure showing "*** a different view
with the same name is already registered" messages at many places.
At the biggning of every metrics test, it tries to register respective
metrics views(metrics data it want present), publish metrics and
uniregister views. Uniregister view is important becuase for next
test it dont need to hold the old metrics data.
unregister() views were getting called using `defer` in
table test for loop, just like
for _, td := range tests {
	defer unregister()
	.......
}
This were resulting unwanted execution behaviour
for unregister() views function, which umtimately faling tests.
Its better to unregister() views before start executing the
tests.

This patch fixes the behaviour by calling uniregister() views function
at the end of loop.

Fixes tektoncd#1659
@tekton-robot tekton-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 11, 2019
Copy link
Member

@vdemeester vdemeester left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 11, 2019
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: vdemeester

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 11, 2019
@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit 21e0683 into tektoncd:master Dec 11, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cla: yes Trying to make the CLA bot happy with ppl from different companies work on one commit lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Unit tests are broken
5 participants