fix flaky net-connect-handle-econnrefused #18257
Conversation
| assert.strictEqual('ECONNREFUSED', e.code); | ||
| })); | ||
| server.close(); | ||
| server.close(() => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test seems a bit racey in general. If you wait for the server to close, couldn't another process potentially take the port?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@cjihrig Hmm... You're right.
I think better is move test-net-connect-handle-econnrefused.js to test/sequential.
If this test run sequentially, another test cannot take the port, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would stick to having it be in parallel and seeing if this fixes it. We need less tests in sequential, not more, as they take a really long time to run.
| assert.strictEqual('ECONNREFUSED', e.code); | ||
| })); | ||
| server.close(); | ||
| server.close(() => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you wrap this in common.mustCall?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@joyeecheung It would be nice. I'll fix it.
|
I agree with @cjihrig, this does not fix potential race conditions that could happen if another process grabs the port before the |
|
In general I agree that we need less tests in sequential but having a racy test is bad as well. We should probably have a look at our sequential tests in general. I am going to open a meta issue for that. @apapirovski are you good with this for now? |
|
Ping @apapirovski |
|
Am I holding this up? I approved this as is, with no changes or nits. My comments was re: keeping it in parallel which it is. I don't think I should be the blocker? If there's concerns, I would suggest running a stress test with |
|
My point was that I actually think it is better to be on the safe side right now. Our CI is really bad at the moment because we have so many flakes and it would be great to reduce those. Working on the sequential ones at a different time to reduce those would for me be the better approach. |
|
Stress test CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-stress-single-test/1776/ and running one locally. If either doesn't pass then we should move to sequential. No failures locally after many runs but the stress test job is always more flaky so that should ultimately decide. |
BridgeAR
added
the
author ready
|
Landed in befe675 🎉 |
PR-URL: nodejs#18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
PR-URL: #18257 Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Anatoli Papirovski <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
The port used in the test could be taken by another process before the callback of `server.close()` is called. Move it to sequential. Refs: nodejs#18257 (comment) Fixes: nodejs#26907
The port used in the test could be taken by another process before the callback of `server.close()` is called. Move it to sequential. PR-URL: nodejs#27014 Fixes: nodejs#26907 Refs: nodejs#18257 (comment) Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <[email protected]>
The port used in the test could be taken by another process before the callback of `server.close()` is called. Move it to sequential. PR-URL: #27014 Fixes: #26907 Refs: #18257 (comment) Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Benjamin Gruenbaum <[email protected]>
This PR closes #18164
I changed timing of connecting to server.
It connects to server after server.close called certainly.
Does that solve this issue?
I'd appreciate any feedback or suggestions.
Checklist
make -j4 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
test