Open chemicL opened 8 months ago
May I handle this issue?
Be my guest @injae-kim :)
Thank you! I'll investigate the cause of failed test and create fix PR soon :)
@Override @Test
public void required_spec312_cancelMustMakeThePublisherToEventuallyStopSignaling() throws Throwable {
// the publisher is able to signal more elements than the subscriber will be requesting in total
final int publisherElements = 20;
final int demand1 = 10;
final int demand2 = 5;
final int totalDemand = demand1 + demand2;
activePublisherTest(publisherElements, false, new PublisherTestRun<T>() {
@Override @SuppressWarnings("ThrowableResultOfMethodCallIgnored")
public void run(Publisher<T> pub) throws Throwable {
final ManualSubscriber<T> sub = env.newManualSubscriber(pub);
sub.request(demand1);
sub.request(demand2);
sub.nextElement();
sub.cancel();
...
// if the Publisher tries to emit more elements than was requested (and/or ignores cancellation) this will throw
assertTrue(onNextsSignalled <= totalDemand,
String.format("Publisher signalled [%d] elements, which is more than the signalled demand: %d",
onNextsSignalled, totalDemand));
I checked that required_spec312_cancelMustMakeThePublisherToEventuallyStopSignaling
TCK test requests 15 elements to upstream and then cancel it, finally assertThat(onNextsSignalled <= 15)
(I'm not sure) but on our FluxBlackboxProcessorVerification
with parallel
, I think publisher can produce element that larger than 15 as you can see on above screen shot.
So I think publisher can produce total 16 items
(e.g. 1 -> 3 -> 6 -> .. -> 20 (15th)
-> Complete(16th)
) and TCK test can be failed!
So I suggest to fix our FluxBlackboxProcessorVerification#ftransformFlux
to always produce 15 items properly. WDYT?
It looks like it's not the test configuration that is broken but some operator along doesn't honour the demand. If the TCK's Subscriber demands 15 items, any configuration that we come up with should not deliver more items. So it seems that at least one operator along the way is broken with that regard. Instead of changing the pipeline to avoid this problematic outcome, perhaps it's best identifying which operator delivers more than was demanded. Some race occurs which doesn't properly synchronise delivery with demand.
It's best identifying which operator delivers more than was demanded. Some race occurs which doesn't properly synchronise delivery with demand.
I agree! good point. I think I found some clue on above investigation, so I'll check it more and share the root cause to you soon.
Thank you for your guide!
The following test failed during CI in 3.4.x
Your Environment
java -version
): Java_Temurin-Hotspot_jdk/8.0.402-6/x64uname -a
): Ubuntu 20.04.6