adriancole commented on a change in pull request #921: Add tests for #920.
"brave.fush" annotation should not be reported for finished spans
URL:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zipkin-brave/pull/921#discussion_r293164584
##########
File path: brave/src/test/java/brave/TracerTest.java
##########
@@ -693,6 +695,52 @@
.isPositive();
}
+ @Test public void useSpanAfterFinished_doesNotCauseBraveFlush() throws
InterruptedException {
+ simulateInProcessPropagation(tracer, tracer);
+ blockOnGC();
+ tracer.newTrace().start().abandon(); //trigger orphaned span check
+ assertThat(spans).hasSize(1);
+ assertThat(spans.stream()
+ .flatMap(span -> span.annotations().stream())
+ .map(Annotation::value)
+ .collect(Collectors.toList())).doesNotContain("brave.flush");
+ }
+
+ @Test public void useSpanAfterFinishedInOtherTracer_doesNotCauseBraveFlush()
+ throws InterruptedException {
+ Tracer noOpTracer = Tracing.newBuilder()
+ .build().tracer();
+ simulateInProcessPropagation(noOpTracer, tracer);
+ blockOnGC();
+ tracer.newTrace().start().abandon(); //trigger orphaned span check
+
+ // We expect the span to be reported to the NOOP reporter, and nothing to
be reported to "spans"
+ assertThat(spans).hasSize(0);
+ assertThat(spans.stream()
+ .flatMap(span -> span.annotations().stream())
+ .map(Annotation::value)
+ .collect(Collectors.toList())).doesNotContain("brave.flush");
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * Must be a separate method from the test method to allow for local
variables to be garbage
+ * collected
+ */
+ private static void simulateInProcessPropagation(Tracer tracer1, Tracer
tracer2) {
Review comment:
I will try to answer your questions:
Q: why let people make instances if should be a singleton?
A: many frameworks handle singletons differently, and there are classloader
concerns, too. brave does not constrain you to using spring, guice, or
otherwise singleton management.
Q: should we be using different instances per endpoint in order to control
the service name?
A: this is complex and likely more fine grained than most use. For most
sites endpoints are actually span names. We have a tool called
FinishedSpanHandler which has the concept of localRoot which would allow you to
rewrite data consistently per fraction of a trace. Again, this is more complex
that what most sites do. if you want to discuss that further better use chat as
it is less spammy to watchers https://gitter.im/openzipkin/zipkin
On the test talking about threads then not using them etc. I personally
found this confusing and it took me a few hours to guess what was supposed to
be checked. (think time not pure work). In general, being precise like your
diagram is best as when comments lie they are distracting to current and future
maintainers. Your tests helped, just it mentioned things that wouldn't have
been tested in that code. thx regardless!
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
