[GitHub] [nifi] Kerr0220 commented on pull request #6508: NIFI-10623 fix flaky tests in TestHttpClient
Kerr0220 commented on PR #6508: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/6508#issuecomment-1352374397 @exceptionfactory That's a good idea. I will have a try! -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [nifi] Kerr0220 commented on pull request #6508: NIFI-10623 fix flaky tests in TestHttpClient
Kerr0220 commented on PR #6508: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/6508#issuecomment-1345362616 > Thanks for the contribution @Kerr0220. > > The `TestHttpClient` class does not fail under normal execution, so any changes must ensure consistent test behavior. These changes break other tests that depend on the current behavior as shown in the automated build results: > > ``` > Error: org.apache.nifi.remote.protocol.http.TestHttpFlowFileServerProtocol.testTransferOneFile Time elapsed: 0.002 s <<< ERROR! > java.io.IOException: StandardHttpFlowFileServerProtocol[CommsID=testTransferOneFile] Sent data to peer Peer[url=http://peer-host:8080/] but calculated CRC32 Checksum as 194624838 while peer calculated CRC32 Checksum as 3229577812; canceling transaction and rolling back session >at org.apache.nifi.remote.protocol.AbstractFlowFileServerProtocol.commitTransferTransaction(AbstractFlowFileServerProtocol.java:345) >at org.apache.nifi.remote.protocol.http.StandardHttpFlowFileServerProtocol.commitTransferTransaction(StandardHttpFlowFileServerProtocol.java:203) >at org.apache.nifi.remote.protocol.http.TestHttpFlowFileServerProtocol.testTransferOneFile(TestHttpFlowFileServerProtocol.java:312) > ``` > > Please follow the pull request checklist and run a full build using `mvn clean install` to ensure that all tests pass. > > Although there may be value in making adjustments to use `LinkedHashMap` and ordering in several cases, the impact is more broad than currently scoped. This problem has been fixed now. And all 5 checks can pass. Please have a look. -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [nifi] Kerr0220 commented on pull request #6508: NIFI-10623 fix flaky tests in TestHttpClient
Kerr0220 commented on PR #6508: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/6508#issuecomment-1345341918 @exceptionfactory Could please help figure out the reason of the cancellation of `ci-workflow / Ubuntu Zulu JDK 17 EN (pull_request)`? Other checks can pass now except this one. :) -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [nifi] Kerr0220 commented on pull request #6508: NIFI-10623 fix flaky tests in TestHttpClient
Kerr0220 commented on PR #6508: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/6508#issuecomment-1344843580 @exceptionfactory Hi, could you please reopen this PR? I've pushed a new commit to this PR. -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [nifi] Kerr0220 commented on pull request #6508: NIFI-10623 fix flaky tests in TestHttpClient
Kerr0220 commented on PR #6508: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/6508#issuecomment-1276890806 Sorry about that, but let me explain it. This pr is related to #6507 which would ensure that this one can pass all checks since they both work on calculating checksum in deterministic(one from sending side, the other from receiving side). Unfortunately, #6507 may not be approved now and thus this one may cause some tests to fail. I'm currently working on further fixing #6507 with other approaches and if #6507 can be accepted, this one should pass tests. And I will mention to you in the future if #6507 can be accepted. Thank you for your time again! -- 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: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
