FrankChen021 commented on code in PR #20626:
URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/20626#discussion_r4302972163


##########
server/src/test/java/org/apache/druid/segment/realtime/appenderator/StreamAppenderatorTest.java:
##########
@@ -189,10 +189,10 @@ public void testSimpleIngestion() throws Exception
       SegmentGenerationMetrics segmentGenerationMetrics = tester.getMetrics();
       Assertions.assertEquals(2, segmentGenerationMetrics.numPersists());
       Assertions.assertEquals(3, segmentGenerationMetrics.rowOutput());
-      Assertions.assertTrue(segmentGenerationMetrics.persistTimeMillis() > 0);
+      Assertions.assertTrue(segmentGenerationMetrics.persistTimeMillis() >= 0);

Review Comment:
   Thanks for the change. Updating the condition to use >= solves the flakiness 
problem, but it changes the semantics of the test case that `persistTimeMillis` 
should be updated.
   
   The root cause here is: incrementPersistTimeMillis adds a millisecond value 
rounded down on every persist, so persists under 1 ms count as 0.
   
   A better fix is(although the change is a little bit broader):
   
   - SegmentGenerationMetrics: store persist time in nanoseconds, add 
persistTimeNanos(), and have persistTimeMillis() convert from nanoseconds.
   - StreamAppenderator / BatchAppenderator: pass nanoseconds.
   - TaskRealtimeMetricsMonitor: subtract in nanoseconds, then convert.
   - Test: assert persistTimeNanos() > 0 and metrics.persistTimeMillis() == 
metrics.persistTimeNanos() / 1000_000
    
   PR title and description should also be updated to reflect the change
   



-- 
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]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to