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

test case to be improved #4882

Open
xtcyclist opened this issue Nov 16, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

test case to be improved #4882

xtcyclist opened this issue Nov 16, 2022 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
affects/none PR/issue: this bug affects none version. severity/none Severity of bug type/enhancement Type: make the code neat or more efficient

Comments

@xtcyclist
Copy link
Contributor

  Scenario: Set up slow query at first graph service
    # Set up a slow query which will be killed later.
    Given a graph with space named "nba"
    When executing query via graph 0:
      """
      GO 100000 STEPS FROM "Tim Duncan" OVER like YIELD like._dst
      """
    Then an ExecutionError should be raised at runtime: Execution had been killed

This test case assumed a slow query threshold that this query may exceeded and cause it to be killed. This assumption may not be ture in all cases, and may block normal tck testing procedures.

Better to specifically set a threshold and execute a query that would deterministicly trigger the threshold.

@xtcyclist xtcyclist added the type/bug Type: something is unexpected label Nov 16, 2022
@wey-gu
Copy link
Contributor

wey-gu commented Nov 16, 2022

cc @zhaojunnana I think we could skip it first.

@wey-gu
Copy link
Contributor

wey-gu commented Nov 16, 2022

@xtcyclist I thought this case was expecting Scenarios to be run in parallel. Thus the following two Scenarios will kill it (with and without needed permission) but the parallel running of the cases is not always true. ?

@xtcyclist
Copy link
Contributor Author

xtcyclist commented Nov 16, 2022

@xtcyclist I thought this case was expecting Scenarios to be run in parallel. Thus the following two Scenarios will kill it (with and without needed permission) but the parallel running of the cases is not always true. ?

It's not an issue for CI for the time being. It is blocking my local testing which runs in serial.

We shall not expect all scenarios to be executed in parallel at the first place. If one test case crashed the services, it would be almost impossible to figure out who it was. If we run tck in serial, this case, for example, would block the overall process.

Leave it here for now. I skip it in my own testing environment.

@wey-gu
Copy link
Contributor

wey-gu commented Nov 16, 2022

True we cannot assume it's always running in parallel. At least we need a label for those cases. And document for devs to add corresponding excluding args when running in serial locally.

@wey-gu wey-gu mentioned this issue Nov 16, 2022
11 tasks
@Sophie-Xie Sophie-Xie added this to the v3.4.0 milestone Nov 17, 2022
@xtcyclist xtcyclist self-assigned this Nov 18, 2022
@xtcyclist xtcyclist added the severity/none Severity of bug label Nov 29, 2022
@HarrisChu HarrisChu added affects/none PR/issue: this bug affects none version. type/enhancement Type: make the code neat or more efficient and removed type/bug Type: something is unexpected labels Dec 1, 2022
@Sophie-Xie Sophie-Xie removed this from the v3.4.0 milestone Jan 3, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
affects/none PR/issue: this bug affects none version. severity/none Severity of bug type/enhancement Type: make the code neat or more efficient
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants