Skip to content
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

GetTransactionStatusRequest for v201 #228

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 31, 2023
Merged

Conversation

Pietfried
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@maaikez
Copy link
Contributor

maaikez commented Oct 26, 2023

Tested with this pull request (test cases E_28 - E_34). All test cases 'with message in queue' fail because:

  • After the CS is online again, a get transaction status request is sent by the csms
  • The CS will immediately send its queued transaction messages
  • After sending the transaction messages, it sends the get transaction status response stating there are no messages in queue (which is correct because they are just sent)
  • So something with the order here. Test case E_31 once failed for another reason, at least at my desk:
    [13:50:02:477] [msg-in] [4,"02dec3dc-0b7b-40dd-92c0-f1b4957e1bbb","SecurityError","",{}]
    After running it again, it had the same issue as the other test, so the security error was only once.

Added the logs of two failing test cases.

ATeam-Maaike-2evse_TC_E_31_CS2023-10-26T13_48_16.339158.log
ATeam-Maaike-2evse_TC_E_29_CS2023-10-26T13_45_14.350661.log

@Pietfried
Copy link
Contributor Author

Tested with this pull request (test cases E_28 - E_34). All test cases 'with message in queue' fail because:

  • After the CS is online again, a get transaction status request is sent by the csms
  • The CS will immediately send its queued transaction messages
  • After sending the transaction messages, it sends the get transaction status response stating there are no messages in queue (which is correct because they are just sent)
  • So something with the order here. Test case E_31 once failed for another reason, at least at my desk:
    [13:50:02:477] [msg-in] [4,"02dec3dc-0b7b-40dd-92c0-f1b4957e1bbb","SecurityError","",{}]
    After running it again, it had the same issue as the other test, so the security error was only once.

Added the logs of two failing test cases.

ATeam-Maaike-2evse_TC_E_31_CS2023-10-26T13_48_16.339158.log ATeam-Maaike-2evse_TC_E_29_CS2023-10-26T13_45_14.350661.log

We are aware of this, @hikinggrass is currently working on that. We need to add a lock to respond to CALL messages first before we initiate own CALL(s)

@hikinggrass
Copy link
Contributor

Tested with this pull request (test cases E_28 - E_34). All test cases 'with message in queue' fail because:

  • After the CS is online again, a get transaction status request is sent by the csms
  • The CS will immediately send its queued transaction messages
  • After sending the transaction messages, it sends the get transaction status response stating there are no messages in queue (which is correct because they are just sent)
  • So something with the order here. Test case E_31 once failed for another reason, at least at my desk:
    [13:50:02:477] [msg-in] [4,"02dec3dc-0b7b-40dd-92c0-f1b4957e1bbb","SecurityError","",{}]
    After running it again, it had the same issue as the other test, so the security error was only once.

Added the logs of two failing test cases.
ATeam-Maaike-2evse_TC_E_31_CS2023-10-26T13_48_16.339158.log ATeam-Maaike-2evse_TC_E_29_CS2023-10-26T13_45_14.350661.log

We are aware of this, @hikinggrass is currently working on that. We need to add a lock to respond to CALL messages first before we initiate own CALL(s)

#231 should hopefully fix this

@Pietfried Pietfried force-pushed the pg-get-transaction-status branch from ca5d07a to 6929e8d Compare October 31, 2023 11:33
@Pietfried Pietfried marked this pull request as ready for review October 31, 2023 11:33
@Pietfried Pietfried requested a review from marcemmers October 31, 2023 11:33
@Pietfried Pietfried force-pushed the pg-get-transaction-status branch from 6929e8d to a993459 Compare October 31, 2023 11:35
@Pietfried Pietfried force-pushed the pg-get-transaction-status branch from a993459 to 3b8855e Compare October 31, 2023 11:36
@Pietfried Pietfried merged commit 9e89830 into main Oct 31, 2023
3 checks passed
@Pietfried Pietfried deleted the pg-get-transaction-status branch October 31, 2023 14:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants