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

test: move test-timers-throw-reschedule to sequential #22379

Conversation

MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

Refs: #21188

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor Author

sigh... it seems like linuxone has decided to consistently fail on this test now, even with moving it to sequential

@apapirovski can you provide any insight into how we might be able to fix this?

@MylesBorins MylesBorins force-pushed the mv-test-timers-throw-reschedule branch from ee2fcc3 to 19d91fa Compare August 17, 2018 21:19
@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor Author

So the first run of this test failed on linuxone, the full CI run didn't.

/cc @nodejs/timers

Setting the test to flaky in this PR so it doesn't block the release

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/16521/

@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member

Oddly parallel/test-stdio-pipe-redirect also only fails on v8.x under load #22378

@joyeecheung
Copy link
Member

joyeecheung commented Aug 17, 2018

This test is no longer on master. The test was added in #20497 which targeted v8.x

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor Author

@joyeecheung test-timers-throw-reschedule is a test that landed directly on 8.x with a backport in #20497

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor Author

landed in 01e2eba

MylesBorins added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2018
This also sets the test as flaky

PR-URL: #22379
Refs: #21188
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
test Issues and PRs related to the tests.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants