KAFKA-18691: Flaky test testFencingOnTransactionExpiration#18793
Merged
jolshan merged 1 commit intoapache:trunkfrom Feb 4, 2025
Merged
KAFKA-18691: Flaky test testFencingOnTransactionExpiration#18793jolshan merged 1 commit intoapache:trunkfrom
jolshan merged 1 commit intoapache:trunkfrom
Conversation
github-actions
Bot
added
core
CalvinLiu7947
approved these changes
Feb 3, 2025
Contributor
CalvinLiu7947
left a comment
CalvinLiu7947
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Thanks for the change!
3 tasks
jeffkbkim
approved these changes
Feb 4, 2025
jolshan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 4, 2025
It appears this test was failing because the transaction was never aborting and the concurrent transactions errors would not go away. ccab9eb introduced the test failure because it requires the transaction to complete, but I suspect the lack of completion was happening before the change. The timeout for the write is based on the transactional timeout, and 100ms seemed too small -- thus the requests to update the state would often repeatedly time out. Also removed the loop since it was not necessary. Reviewers: Jeff Kim <jeff.kim@confluent.io>, Calvin Liu <caliu@confluent.io>
3 tasks
pdruley
pushed a commit
to pdruley/kafka
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2025
) It appears this test was failing because the transaction was never aborting and the concurrent transactions errors would not go away. ccab9eb introduced the test failure because it requires the transaction to complete, but I suspect the lack of completion was happening before the change. The timeout for the write is based on the transactional timeout, and 100ms seemed too small -- thus the requests to update the state would often repeatedly time out. Also removed the loop since it was not necessary. Reviewers: Jeff Kim <jeff.kim@confluent.io>, Calvin Liu <caliu@confluent.io>
manoj-mathivanan
pushed a commit
to manoj-mathivanan/kafka
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 19, 2025
) It appears this test was failing because the transaction was never aborting and the concurrent transactions errors would not go away. ccab9eb introduced the test failure because it requires the transaction to complete, but I suspect the lack of completion was happening before the change. The timeout for the write is based on the transactional timeout, and 100ms seemed too small -- thus the requests to update the state would often repeatedly time out. Also removed the loop since it was not necessary. Reviewers: Jeff Kim <jeff.kim@confluent.io>, Calvin Liu <caliu@confluent.io>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It appears this test was failing because the transaction was never aborting and the concurrent transactions errors would not go away.
ccab9eb introduced the test failure because it requires the transaction to complete, but I suspect the lack of completion was happening before the change.
The timeout for the write is based on the transactional timeout, and 100ms seemed too small -- thus the requests to update the state would often repeatedly time out.
Also removed the loop since it was not necessary.