Copilot commented on code in PR #24415:
URL: https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/24415#discussion_r3523482238
##########
core/camel-core/src/test/java/org/apache/camel/processor/RecipientListParallelStreamingTest.java:
##########
@@ -49,8 +56,8 @@ public void configure() {
from("direct:streaming").recipientList(header("foo")).parallelProcessing().streaming().to("mock:result");
-
from("direct:a").delay(100).syncDelayed().transform(constant("a"));
-
from("direct:b").delay(500).syncDelayed().transform(constant("b"));
+
from("direct:a").delay(500).syncDelayed().transform(constant("a"));
+
from("direct:b").delay(2000).syncDelayed().transform(constant("b"));
Review Comment:
With the delays increased to 500ms/2000ms to stabilize the streaming
ordering, the non-streaming route now also pays that delay cost because it
reuses the same `direct:a`/`direct:b` routes. To keep the test suite fast,
consider adding non-delayed variants for the non-streaming test and reserving
the delayed routes for the streaming scenario.
##########
core/camel-core/src/test/java/org/apache/camel/processor/RecipientListParallelStreamingTest.java:
##########
@@ -30,14 +34,17 @@ public void testRecipientListParallel() throws Exception {
template.sendBodyAndHeader("direct:start", "Hello World", "foo",
"direct:a,direct:b,direct:c");
Review Comment:
The increased delays on `direct:a`/`direct:b` make this non-streaming test
wait for the slowest recipient as well, which likely adds ~2s to the runtime
even though ordering isn’t timing-dependent here. Consider using separate
(non-delayed) endpoints for this test and keep the delayed ones only for the
streaming case.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
