> On Jan. 3, 2014, 12:22 a.m., Andrew Stitcher wrote: > > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/tests/ha_tests.py, line 237 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/16577/diff/1/?file=413695#file413695line237> > > > > This doesn't appear to be an HA test why is it in these tests? > > Alan Conway wrote: > Agreed, should be in the qpid/python tests somewhere. I'll look for an > appropriate place. > > Alan Conway wrote: > The trick here is that the failover part of the test requires starting > and killing a second broker, which is beyond the capabilities of the > qpid/python tests. > Options I can see: > - leave it where it is since it tests failover which is HA-related > - create a new cpp/src/tests/python_client_test.py test suite (using > brokertest.py) with this test to start, can collect further python client > tests there that need to start/stop brokers but don't require the use of the > HA plugin. > I will do the latter if you think it is worthwhile. > > Andrew Stitcher wrote: > Hmm, I think the broker starting functionality in the python test > framework is much more recent than the original python tests, but perhaps the > original python tests should actually start the broker itself. > > On the other hand I think the python test can actually be used against > both the c++ and java brokers, so perhaps it should only start the broker if > how to do that can be specified. > > If this test is specific to the C++ broker then I think it probably > should actually start a new set of tests and we should migrate tests there > that are specific to the C++ broker. > > I'll stop rambling now - hope that made sense.
See reply to comment below. The issue is not so much that this is specific to the C++ broker, as that it needs brokers to be dynamically stopped and started during the test. That makes it hard to use a static, externally-started broker the way the other tests under qpid/python do. - Alan ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16577/#review31093 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 6, 2014, 8:46 p.m., Alan Conway wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/16577/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 6, 2014, 8:46 p.m.) > > > Review request for qpid, Gordon Sim and Rafael Schloming. > > > Bugs: qpid-5428 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/qpid-5428 > > > Repository: qpid > > > Description > ------- > > QPID-5428: Heartbeats not in use when attempting to connect with python > client. > > Heartbeats ignored when opening a connection, could hang indefinitely > Need to cover 3 cases (test included): > - Connect sucessful but then broker stalls. > - Connect to a stalled broker that never responds. > - Fail-over to a stalled broker that never responds > > All cases are handled by the following fixes to driver.py: > - Check for heartbeats even before engine._connected since we may time out > before receiving open-ok if the peer is stalled and never sends data. > - Set _last_in and _last_out so that we time heartbeats from the start of the > connection if no data is ever sent or received. > - Call self.update_status in Driver.timeout to detect connection closed due to > heartbeat timeout (rather than a readable or writeable event.) > Make update_status a no-op if engine or transport are not yet set up. > - Don't consider reconnect complete in connect(), wait till we get the > open-ok. > See the comment on Driver._check_retry_ok() > > > Diffs > ----- > > /trunk/qpid/cpp/src/tests/ha_tests.py 1555989 > /trunk/qpid/python/qpid/messaging/driver.py 1555989 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16577/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Alan Conway > >
