LucasEby opened a new pull request, #24877:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/24877
<!--
### Contribution Checklist
- PR title format should be *[type][component] summary*. For details, see
*[Guideline - Pulsar PR Naming
Convention](https://pulsar.apache.org/contribute/develop-semantic-title/)*.
- Fill out the template below to describe the changes contributed by the
pull request. That will give reviewers the context they need to do the review.
- Each pull request should address only one issue, not mix up code from
multiple issues.
- Each commit in the pull request has a meaningful commit message
- Once all items of the checklist are addressed, remove the above text and
this checklist, leaving only the filled out template below.
-->
<!-- Either this PR fixes an issue, -->
Fixes #24876
<!-- Details of when a PIP is required and how the PIP process work, please
see: https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/pip/README.md -->
### Motivation
<!-- Explain here the context, and why you're making that change. What is
the problem you're trying to solve. -->
The original test performed six assertions using the `expectThrows` method
but was based on two incorrect assumptions. First, it implicitly assumed that
field validation within
[IOConfigUtils.java](https://github.com/apache/pulsar/blob/master/pulsar-io/common/src/main/java/org/apache/pulsar/io/common/IOConfigUtils.java)
would occur in a consistent order. However, IOConfigUtils iterates over
configuration fields using the loop `(Field field : getAllFields(clazz))`, and
`getAllFields()` calls
[Class.getDeclaredFields](https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/lang/Class.html#getDeclaredFields--),
which returns an array of fields that are not sorted and not in any particular
order. Second, the test initialized multiple required fields as null
simultaneously, assuming the validation would fail in a specific order. In
reality, the nondeterministic field iteration order can cause different missing
fields to be detected first, leading to inconsistent exception messages and
nondeterm
inistic test failures due to different environments producing the contents in
different orders despite the logical contents being the same.
-
pulsar-io/kafka/src/test/java/org/apache/pulsar/io/kafka/sink/KafkaAbstractSinkTest.java
### Modifications
<!-- Describe the modifications you've done. -->
Instead of reusing and mutating the same map, each validation case now
creates it's own copy of the valid base config data with ``validConfig``` prior
to mutating it and later asserting. By isolating the mutations for each test,
this ensures the behavior will be as expected. To make the code easier to read,
a tiny table of cases was added (`record Case(...)`) which is made up of the
basic components of the original test cases: how the data should be mutated,
the expected exception type, and the expected message. The final sanity check
which ensures the valid config passes was preserved. These changes ensure the
test passes consistently, even when the fields are checked in a different order.
In essence, these changes keep the spirit of the original tests while
eliminating failures caused solely by allowed (but previously unexpected)
reordering.
### Verifying this change
- [x] Make sure that the change passes the CI checks.
This change is already covered by existing tests, such as
-
`pulsar-io/kafka/src/test/java/org/apache/pulsar/io/kafka/sink/KafkaAbstractSinkTest.java`
### Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
<!-- DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION. CHECK THE PROPER BOX ONLY. -->
*If the box was checked, please highlight the changes*
- [ ] Dependencies (add or upgrade a dependency)
- [ ] The public API
- [ ] The schema
- [ ] The default values of configurations
- [ ] The threading model
- [ ] The binary protocol
- [ ] The REST endpoints
- [ ] The admin CLI options
- [ ] The metrics
- [ ] Anything that affects deployment
### Documentation
<!-- DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION. CHECK THE PROPER BOX ONLY. -->
- [ ] `doc` <!-- Your PR contains doc changes. -->
- [ ] `doc-required` <!-- Your PR changes impact docs and you will update
later -->
- [x] `doc-not-needed` <!-- Your PR changes do not impact docs -->
- [ ] `doc-complete` <!-- Docs have been already added -->
### Matching PR in forked repository
PR in forked repository: https://github.com/LucasEby/pulsar/pull/7
<!--
After opening this PR, the build in apache/pulsar will fail and instructions
will
be provided for opening a PR in the PR author's forked repository.
apache/pulsar pull requests should be first tested in your own fork since
the
apache/pulsar CI based on GitHub Actions has constrained resources and quota.
GitHub Actions provides separate quota for pull requests that are executed
in
a forked repository.
The tests will be run in the forked repository until all PR review comments
have
been handled, the tests pass and the PR is approved by a reviewer.
-->
--
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]
