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

[Draft] VTGate: Update txn_rollback_shutdown_test.go to actually assert transaction rollback #16839

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

brendar
Copy link
Contributor

@brendar brendar commented Sep 24, 2024

The original test does not actually assert that the transaction was rolled back. It was just asserting that a new transaction can't see rows written by the other open transaction, which is expected behavior at the default isolation level.

This test now fails with

Error:      	Received unexpected error:
                target: ks.0.primary: vttablet: Statement aborted because lock(s) could not be acquired immediately and NOWAIT is set. (errno 3572) (sqlstate HY000) (CallerID: userData1): Sql: "select * from buffer where id = :id /* INT64 */ for update nowait", BindVars: {#maxLimit: "type:INT64 value:\"10001\""id: "type:INT64 value:\"3\""} (errno 3572) (sqlstate HY000) during query: select * from buffer where id = 3 for update nowait
Test:       	TestTransactionRollBackWhenShutDown
Messages:   	for query: select * from buffer where id = 3 for update nowait

Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Sep 24, 2024

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Sep 24, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v21.0.0 milestone Sep 24, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 24, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 69.49%. Comparing base (83b37b8) to head (9ef4340).
Report is 183 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #16839      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   69.54%   69.49%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        1569     1569              
  Lines      202555   202633      +78     
==========================================
- Hits       140865   140829      -36     
- Misses      61690    61804     +114     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 8, 2024

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. and removed Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. labels Nov 8, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 9, 2024

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. and removed Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. labels Dec 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants