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

client: make set/delete one shot operations #5888

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 7, 2016

Conversation

heyitsanthony
Copy link
Contributor

Old behavior would retry set and delete even if there's an error. This
can lead to the client returning an error for deleting twice, instead
of returning an error for an interdeterminate state.

Fixes #5832

@heyitsanthony
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @yorkart

@xiang90
Copy link
Contributor

xiang90 commented Jul 7, 2016

is it easy to add a test for this?

@heyitsanthony
Copy link
Contributor Author

@xiang90 I think so; will add some integration tests around it

@heyitsanthony
Copy link
Contributor Author

tests added /cc @xiang90

@xiang90
Copy link
Contributor

xiang90 commented Jul 7, 2016

lgtm

)

// TestV2NoRetryEOF tests destructive api calls won't retry on a disconnection.
func TestV2NoRetryEOF(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

one thing: shall we move this to client/integration?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

seems like overkill, maybe if we add more tests in the future?

Anthony Romano added 2 commits July 7, 2016 15:51
Old behavior would retry set and delete even if there's an error. This
can lead to the client returning an error for deleting twice, instead
of returning an error for an interdeterminate state.

Fixes etcd-io#5832
@heyitsanthony
Copy link
Contributor Author

moved to client/integration, exported some bits of integration /cc @xiang90

@xiang90
Copy link
Contributor

xiang90 commented Jul 7, 2016

lgtm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants