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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
tests(clustering): dp status ready when use RPC Sync #14035
tests(clustering): dp status ready when use RPC Sync #14035
Changes from all commits
b199657
afb2218
8484c23
fea9118
03bbae7
a5fb458
0fa56f8
3aed793
5e24567
ef07a4a
3aa41c2
26dc2a4
b03b074
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.
I think that you misunderstand my words, we still need this case for rpc_sync = off but not use
skip_rpc_sync
, it should be a normalit()
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.
fixed
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.
It should also support
{"off", "off"}
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.
note that "off" "off" has been supported by original test case, see Line 107,
I think we should write a completely new
on on
case to test incremental sync mode, likeSo the new case does not need to support on
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.
because the original case (off off) will restart CP, if we implement new case in this scenario, current CP/DP incremental sync is hard to make the case stable, it is easy to get flakiness.
Why?
because restarting CP will cause DP connecting CP and introduce some delay, and currently in incremental sync feature, we could not have a good way to ensure the established connection between CP and DP. I think if we want to test CP/DP restart , we could file a new kag to track.