test: state sync cleanup #11980
test: state sync cleanup #11980
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this seems to duplicate sanity/gc_after_sync1.py except for the single shard tracking part. Can you adapt that test to have 2 cases. one with all shards tracking and one with single shard tracking?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about renaming the new test to gc_after_sync_single_shard_tracking ? Having two test cases in single file did not work for me well, and the old test takes 5x longer to execute. Also, there are more differences, e.g. in the new test we stop validator node.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now I think gc_after_sync1 is better and we do not need gc_after_node_offline.
I would remove this one, gc_after_shard_switch suffices.
I see why gc_after_sync1 fails, working on that.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #11980 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 71.57% 71.50% -0.07%
==========================================
Files 810 810
Lines 163803 163949 +146
Branches 163803 163949 +146
==========================================
- Hits 117237 117229 -8
- Misses 41486 41640 +154
Partials 5080 5080
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Issue: #11883
Add two tests:
gc_after_node_offline- make a node offline for more than 1 epoch and bring it back, eventually old block data should be gc-ed.gc_after_shard_switch- change tracked shard for a node, eventually old data (including chunks for the shard that is no longer tracked) should be gc-ed.Both tests currently fail.
Run with (for
gc_after_node_offline):