On (18/04/16 11:14), Michal Židek wrote: >On 04/18/2016 10:39 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: >>On (02/12/15 17:10), Michal Židek wrote: >>>Hi! >>> >>>I saw some integration tests failures recently, >>>and I think there is a race condition between the >>>enumeration refresh timeout and the sleeps >>>after some operations that wait for this timeout. >>>SSSD fails to populate changes from LDAP in time >>>and some asserts can fail because of this. >>> >>>So far I saw 4 tests to fail like this, which >>>is already quite a lot. >>> >>>The attached patch modifies the timeout values >>>and hopefully removes the issue. >>> >>>Michal >> >>I think I found alternative solution for intermittent >>failures of ADD REMOVE test with enumeration. > >Not sure if this is safer than my patch. I made the >timeouts bigger on purpose, so that we avoid >problems with machines under heavy load. > >You decided to go the opposite direction by >making one of the timeouts shorter. > >That being said, maybe your patch is better, >because if it does not fail even under heavy >load it will make the tests shorter. > >Once the CI is up we can try 20 test >runs with your patch and if they do not >fail I will give you an ACK. > >If they fail, we can still fallback to my patch. > No, We will need to find another solution. Increasing timeout is not acceptable from long term perspective. We need to have faster tests and not slower.
LS _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
