-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[prometheusremotewriteexporter] Correctly run all prw unit tests, and skip intentional WAL failure. #8401
Conversation
Unfortunately, I'm not sure it's a simple fix. The issue seems to be the expectation of an error returned from I think it might make sense to separate this out so that it is only tested for the non-WAL case and then separately test for correct handling of server errors when a WAL is in use. |
Sounds good. I'll go ahead and add that onto this PR when I get the chance |
9e65a78
to
5867060
Compare
Updated to skip the test when the WAL is in use. I also cleaned up the cases a bit so all tests don't have to set |
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
6de32e3
to
4808b71
Compare
Failing because of #9255 Edit: no longer failing. |
4808b71
to
630b39c
Compare
630b39c
to
dc165d4
Compare
dc165d4
to
6f2fca2
Compare
This is still waiting on review, and fixes important Prometheus unit tests. |
This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
… skip intentional WAL failure. (open-telemetry#8401) * correctly run all prw unit tests * reformat test cases, and omit zero values * skip unsupported test when using WAL
Description:
While working on a different PR, I found that PRW tests are not actually running each case. It runs the last case a whole bunch of times instead. Declaring the test case as a local var fixes this, but uncovers a WAL test failure. This PR skips that test only for the WAL case.
The failure for the WAL case:
Follow-up from #4751.