Myasuka commented on code in PR #19399:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/19399#discussion_r845764781
##########
flink-state-backends/flink-statebackend-rocksdb/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/contrib/streaming/state/EmbeddedRocksDBStateBackendTest.java:
##########
@@ -619,6 +623,25 @@ public void testSharedIncrementalStateDeRegistration()
throws Exception {
}
}
+ @Test(expected = FlinkRuntimeException.class)
+ public void testMapStateClear() throws Exception {
+ setupRocksKeyedStateBackend();
+ keyedStateBackend = spy(keyedStateBackend);
+ MapStateDescriptor<Integer, String> kvId =
+ new MapStateDescriptor<>("id", Integer.class, String.class);
+ MapState<Integer, String> state =
+ keyedStateBackend.getPartitionedState(
+ VoidNamespace.INSTANCE,
VoidNamespaceSerializer.INSTANCE, kvId);
+
+ doAnswer(
+ invocationOnMock -> {
+ throw new RocksDBException("Artificial failure");
+ })
+ .when(keyedStateBackend)
+ .getWriteOptions();
Review Comment:
We could change the implementation of state#clear in the future, and we
might not call `keyedStateBackend`, however, we would not change the kernel
logic of mapState#clear that we would always create a rocksdb iterator.
I think the logic of spying on creating a iterator could be referred:
~~~ java
doAnswer(
new Answer<Object>() {
@Override
public Object answer(InvocationOnMock
invocationOnMock)
throws Throwable {
RocksIterator rocksIterator =
spy((RocksIterator)
invocationOnMock.callRealMethod());
allCreatedCloseables.add(rocksIterator);
return rocksIterator;
}
})
.when(keyedStateBackend.db)
.newIterator(any(ColumnFamilyHandle.class),
any(ReadOptions.class));
~~~
##########
flink-state-backends/flink-statebackend-rocksdb/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/contrib/streaming/state/EmbeddedRocksDBStateBackendTest.java:
##########
@@ -89,9 +93,9 @@
import static org.mockito.Matchers.any;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.doAnswer;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.reset;
+import static org.mockito.Mockito.spy;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.verify;
import static org.mockito.internal.verification.VerificationModeFactory.times;
-import static org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito.spy;
Review Comment:
Why we have to change the `spy` implementation here?
--
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]
