StefanRRichter commented on a change in pull request #7568: [FLINK-11417] Make access to ExecutionGraph single threaded from JobMaster main thread URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/7568#discussion_r251000351
########## File path: flink-runtime/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/concurrent/ScheduledFutureAdapterTest.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ + +package org.apache.flink.runtime.concurrent; + +import org.junit.Assert; +import org.junit.Before; +import org.junit.Test; +import org.mockito.Mockito; + +import java.util.concurrent.Delayed; +import java.util.concurrent.Future; +import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit; +import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean; +import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLong; + +import static org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito.spy; + +/** + * Unit tests for {@link ScheduledFutureAdapter}. + */ +public class ScheduledFutureAdapterTest { + + private ScheduledFutureAdapter objectUnderTest; + private Future<Integer> innerDelegate; + private AtomicBoolean resultCancel; + private AtomicBoolean resultIsCancelled; + private AtomicBoolean resultIsDone; + + @Before + public void before() throws Exception { + this.resultCancel = new AtomicBoolean(false); + this.resultIsCancelled = new AtomicBoolean(false); + this.resultIsDone = new AtomicBoolean(false); + + this.innerDelegate = spy(new Future<Integer>() { + @Override + public boolean cancel(boolean mayInterruptIfRunning) { + return resultCancel.get(); + } + + @Override + public boolean isCancelled() { + return resultIsCancelled.get(); + } + + @Override + public boolean isDone() { + return resultIsDone.get(); + } + + @Override + public Integer get() { + return 4711; + } + + @Override + public Integer get(long timeout, TimeUnit unit) { + return 4711; + } + }); + + this.objectUnderTest = new ScheduledFutureAdapter<>(innerDelegate, 4200L, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS); + } + + @Test + public void testForwardedMethods() throws Exception { + + Assert.assertEquals(4711, objectUnderTest.get()); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate).get(); + + Assert.assertEquals(4711, objectUnderTest.get(42L, TimeUnit.SECONDS)); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate).get(42L, TimeUnit.SECONDS); + + Assert.assertEquals(resultCancel.get(), objectUnderTest.cancel(true)); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate, Mockito.times(1)).cancel(true); + + resultCancel.set(!resultCancel.get()); + Assert.assertEquals(resultCancel.get(), objectUnderTest.cancel(true)); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate, Mockito.times(2)).cancel(true); + + Assert.assertEquals(resultIsCancelled.get(), objectUnderTest.isCancelled()); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate, Mockito.times(1)).isCancelled(); + + resultIsCancelled.set(!resultIsCancelled.get()); + Assert.assertEquals(resultIsCancelled.get(), objectUnderTest.isCancelled()); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate, Mockito.times(2)).isCancelled(); + + Assert.assertEquals(resultIsDone.get(), objectUnderTest.isDone()); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate, Mockito.times(1)).isDone(); + + resultIsDone.set(!resultIsDone.get()); + Assert.assertEquals(resultIsDone.get(), objectUnderTest.isDone()); + Mockito.verify(innerDelegate, Mockito.times(2)).isDone(); Review comment: I always think this is one of the few cases where mockito is not a supid thing to use.Do you think it is so much slower that we rather write more boilerplate code? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on 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
