damccorm opened a new pull request, #41228:
URL: https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/41228

   ## Summary
   
   - Fixes a flake in `:sdks:go:test:prismValidatesRunner` 
(`TestTriggerAfterSynchronizedProcessingTime` failing with `expected 2 
collections, but got: 3` in 
https://github.com/apache/beam/actions/runs/43083145592 and 
https://github.com/apache/beam/actions/runs/43099848241).
   - Previously, `TriggerAfterSynchronizedProcessingTime` in Prism had 
`shouldFire` return `!ts.finished` without checking whether processing time had 
advanced past the initial clock time (or past the previous firing time when 
wrapped in `TriggerRepeatedly`).
   - In `TestTriggerAfterSynchronizedProcessingTime` (which uses 
`trigger.Repeat(trigger.AfterSynchronizedProcessingTime())` without advancing 
`TestStream` processing time), whenever `stage.Execute` channel-split the 
initial 3-element `TestStream` bundle into two bundles in Docker mode, 
`Repeat(AfterSynchronizedProcessingTime())` fired once on each split bundle in 
window `[0, 10000)`, emitting 3 panes total instead of 2.
   - Track `afterProcessingTimeState` in 
`TriggerAfterSynchronizedProcessingTime` so it requires processing time to 
advance past the initial `TestStream` clock time 
(`mtime.FromTime(time.Time{})`) before firing, and advances `firingTime` to 
`s.emNow + 1` on `reset` when repeated.
   
   ## Test Plan
   
   - `go test ./pkg/beam/runners/prism/...`
   - `go test -v ./test/integration/primitives -run "TestTrigger.*"`
   - `./gradlew :runners:prism:java:prismLoopbackValidatesRunnerTests --tests 
"org.apache.beam.sdk.transforms.GroupByKeyTest*" --tests 
"org.apache.beam.sdk.testing.TestStreamTest"`
   
   ### Verification
   - Triggered `beam_PreCommit_GoPrism.yml` workflow run on branch: 
[`43119696481`](https://github.com/apache/beam/actions/runs/43119696481)
   


-- 
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.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to