jfarr commented on a change in pull request #11090: [BEAM-9470]
:sdks:java:io:kinesis:test is flaky
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11090#discussion_r391917813
##########
File path:
sdks/java/io/kinesis/src/test/java/org/apache/beam/sdk/io/kinesis/ShardReadersPoolTest.java
##########
@@ -324,10 +325,15 @@ public void shouldCallRateLimitPolicy()
}
}
+ ArgumentCaptor<List<KinesisRecord>> recordsCaptor =
ArgumentCaptor.forClass(List.class);
+ verify(customRateLimitPolicy,
atLeastOnce()).onSuccess(recordsCaptor.capture());
+ List<List<KinesisRecord>> capturedRecords = recordsCaptor.getAllValues();
+ assertThat(capturedRecords).contains(
+ ImmutableList.of(a, b),
+ singletonList(c),
+ singletonList(d),
+ Collections.emptyList()
+ );
verify(customRateLimitPolicy).onThrottle(same(e));
- verify(customRateLimitPolicy).onSuccess(eq(ImmutableList.of(a, b)));
- verify(customRateLimitPolicy).onSuccess(eq(singletonList(c)));
- verify(customRateLimitPolicy).onSuccess(eq(singletonList(d)));
Review comment:
> Since, in case of using the real RateLimitPolicy in normal code, the
instances of them will be created per every readLoop() thread (right?). So, we
need to test it in the same way with mock policies.
It's possible for a custom RateLimitPolicyFactory to return a singleton
instance of RateLimitPolicy, and I think that should be fine (as long as it's
thread-safe). So maybe we shouldn't assume that they will always be different
instances.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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
