refactor: introduce CacheManager#2785
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2785 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage ? 53.58%
=========================================
Files ? 132
Lines ? 11550
Branches ? 0
=========================================
Hits ? 6189
Misses ? 4882
Partials ? 479
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
The PR title should avoid using an abbreviation for a net-new concept (CMT) as it will make release notes harder to read |
|
@anlandu fyi |
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
removes todos Signed-off-by: alex <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
| @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@ | |||
| package cachemanager | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's remember that config_controller_test, by definition, tests the sync controller, which will test that the CM handles the current uses cases as well.
So the new tests here are meant to only target the cachemanager in as much isolation as possible from controllers.
Another point to remember is that as we build the background replay process more into the cachemanager, the tests will change to cover the new functionality.
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@maxsmythe @ritazh @sozercan PTAL when y'all have some time! 🙏🏼 |
ping :) |
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Pana <8968914+acpana@users.noreply.github.com>
sozercan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for the delay, thanks! LGTM
meta
Factors out data mgmt & replication from the
sync_controller.