[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9102?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14617109#comment-14617109
]
Ariel Weisberg commented on CASSANDRA-9102:
-------------------------------------------
That coverage information is very helpful. Do you happen to have a hash for the
version you generated the coverage for?
I think a side channel like JMX or a property would work. Slightly more
flexible might be to be able to annotate the request to indicate that the
request wants some specific kind of failure injection. We already have support
for tacking stuff onto requests for tracing. Maybe that can be adapted?
I think completing the coverage of storage proxy is something should be scoped
in a separate ticket.
> Consistency levels such as non-local quorum need better tests
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-9102
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9102
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Test
> Reporter: Ariel Weisberg
> Assignee: Stefania
> Attachments: jacoco.diff, jacoco.tar.gz
>
>
> We didn't catch unit testing for this functionality. There is dtest
> consistency_test but it doesn't cover non-local functionality.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
