Skip to content

test(users): force 10 seconds sleep to improve reliability #1215

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

max-wittig
Copy link
Member

I'm welcome for better ideas

Comment on lines +57 to 58
time.sleep(10)
new_user.delete()
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this should go after, because the delete itself is taking too long:

Suggested change
time.sleep(10)
new_user.delete()
new_user.delete()
time.sleep(10)

Looks like we really need this. I thought my little sidekiq wait hack would work though 🤕 I based it off of this, but I'm not sure if we can extract from the API when this exact sidekiq deletion job is finished:

We can't guarantee when the user will actually be deleted by Sidekiq; this could take a while if the user has a lot of projects/events/etc.

I'll keep looking into this later, maybe we could also just wrap these asserts in retries until the condition is met (with a timeout), since it seems to me like GitLab gets more bloated with new features and so things can take longer with new releases on these little Travis VMs?

They do perform better during the day/office hours though, just retried all the jobs and they're going green 🤣

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe use something like flaky for this?

@JohnVillalovos
Copy link
Member

Maybe we don't need this anymore.

Seems like #1316 might have resolved the issue.

Not 100% sure, but I haven't noticed this error since it got merged.

@nejch
Copy link
Member

nejch commented Mar 7, 2021

Maybe we don't need this anymore.

Seems like #1316 might have resolved the issue.

Not 100% sure, but I haven't noticed this error since it got merged.

True, I think your PR fixed it! We can probably close this now and re-enable the other flaky test as well.

@nejch nejch closed this Mar 7, 2021
@nejch nejch deleted the fix/flaky-test branch May 30, 2021 08:23
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