echauchot commented on code in PR #22985:
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/22985#discussion_r1358346133
##########
flink-runtime/src/test/java/org/apache/flink/runtime/scheduler/adaptive/ExecutingTest.java:
##########
@@ -252,28 +257,96 @@ public void testTransitionToFinishedOnSuspend() throws
Exception {
}
@Test
- public void
testNotifyNewResourcesAvailableWithCanScaleUpTransitionsToRestarting()
+ public void
testNotifyNewResourcesAvailableBeforeCooldownIsOverScheduledStateChange()
+ throws Exception {
+ try (MockExecutingContext ctx = new MockExecutingContext()) {
+ final Duration scalingIntervalMin =
+ Duration.ofSeconds(1L); // do not wait too long in the test
+ final ExecutingStateBuilder executingStateBuilder =
+ new
ExecutingStateBuilder().setScalingIntervalMin(scalingIntervalMin);
+ Executing exec = executingStateBuilder.build(ctx);
+ exec.setLastRescale(Instant.now());
+ ctx.setCanScaleUp(true, null); // min met => rescale
+ ctx.setExpectRestarting( // scheduled rescale should restart the
job after cooldown
+ restartingArguments -> {
+ assertThat(restartingArguments.getBackoffTime(),
is(Duration.ZERO));
+ assertThat(ctx.actionWasScheduled, is(true));
+ });
+ exec.onNewResourcesAvailable();
+ }
+ }
+
+ @Test
+ public void
testNotifyNewResourcesAvailableAfterCooldownIsOverStateChange() throws
Exception {
+ try (MockExecutingContext ctx = new MockExecutingContext()) {
+ final ExecutingStateBuilder executingStateBuilder =
+ new
ExecutingStateBuilder().setScalingIntervalMin(Duration.ofSeconds(20L));
+ Executing exec = executingStateBuilder.build(ctx);
+ exec.setLastRescale(Instant.now().minus(Duration.ofSeconds(30L)));
+ ctx.setCanScaleUp(true, null); // min met => rescale
+ ctx.setExpectRestarting(
+ restartingArguments -> { // immediate rescale
+ assertThat(restartingArguments.getBackoffTime(),
is(Duration.ZERO));
+ assertThat(ctx.actionWasScheduled, is(false));
+ });
+ exec.onNewResourcesAvailable();
+ }
+ }
+
+ @Test
+ public void
testNotifyNewResourcesAvailableWithMinMetTransitionsToRestarting()
Review Comment:
done. I agree that keeping high level semantics rather than implementation
semantics is good but I feel like with this renaming we loose the real use case
semantics that these tests are assessing: resources too small, resources lost
etc...
--
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]
