if you can add a time.Sleep(time.Millisecond) somewhere and a test breaks, then its likely to break in CI at some point.
I'm ok with the change as proposed, but it might actually be better to force something about the connection to be slow on the other side.
John =:->
On Feb 14, 2018 7:50 PM, "Joseph Phillips" <email address hidden> wrote:
> Changing the timeout to a nanosecond is likely sufficient, but I also > added a retry loop just to make sure. > > https://github.com/juju/juju/pull/8378 > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to juju. > Matching subscriptions: juju bugs > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1749081 > > Title: > intermittent unit failure: worker_test.go:231: > WorkerSuite.TestTransportTimeout > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju/+bug/1749081/+subscriptions >
if you can add a time.Sleep( time.Millisecon d) somewhere and a test breaks,
then its likely to break in CI at some point.
I'm ok with the change as proposed, but it might actually be better to
force something about the connection to be slow on the other side.
John
=:->
On Feb 14, 2018 7:50 PM, "Joseph Phillips" <email address hidden>
wrote:
> Changing the timeout to a nanosecond is likely sufficient, but I also /github. com/juju/ juju/pull/ 8378 /bugs.launchpad .net/bugs/ 1749081 TestTransportTi meout /bugs.launchpad .net/juju/ +bug/1749081/ +subscriptions
> added a retry loop just to make sure.
>
> https:/
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to juju.
> Matching subscriptions: juju bugs
> https:/
>
> Title:
> intermittent unit failure: worker_test.go:231:
> WorkerSuite.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https:/
>