-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
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
[Spark][2.4] Fix flaky test suite DeltaSourceDeletionVectorsSuite #2001
[Spark][2.4] Fix flaky test suite DeltaSourceDeletionVectorsSuite #2001
Conversation
new StreamManualClock(System.currentTimeMillis())), | ||
AdvanceManualClock(10L * 1000L), | ||
StartStream(Trigger.ProcessingTime(1000), clock), | ||
AdvanceManualClock(1000L), |
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 part is basically no different from before .. isnt it?
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.
Yeah, just got rid of some unnecessary large numbers.
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.
Makes it clearer imo that all the units match up as well.
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.
But the numbers themselves dont matter for the runtime since its manual clock.. isnt it? just making sure.
Making consistent is definitely great.
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.
Yeah, the numbers are irrelevant. This purely a readability improvement.
CheckAnswer((0 until 15): _*), | ||
AssertOnQuery { q => | ||
// Make sure we only processed a single batch since the initial data load. |
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.
Which check was flaky here?
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.
The stream hadn't always stopped processing before we executed the 2 DML commands. So they'd sometimes end up together in the same batch and sometimes in two different batches, because they were processing even before the second increase of the clock. The thing that finally fixed it was adding the waiting for the stream to settle down before even starting on the DML commands.
Description
(Cherrypick of 67c4b98 to branch-2.4)
Fixes #1982
How was this patch tested?
Testing-only PR.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing changes?
No.