-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.6k
More resilient ILM history rollover test #61973
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
More resilient ILM history rollover test #61973
Conversation
|
Pinging @elastic/es-core-features (:Core/Features/ILM+SLM) |
| SearchResponse search = client().prepareSearch(firstIndex).setQuery(matchQuery("index", firstIndex)).setSize(0).get(); | ||
| assertThat(search.getHits().getTotalHits().value, is(9L)); | ||
| } catch (Exception e) { | ||
| fail(e.getMessage()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for fixing this Przemko.
Can you add a comment on why this is needed please? it's not obvious assertBusy fails on the first non-AssertionError exception. We could also use assertHitCount maybe?
Is it worth also increasing the timeout of assertBusy to 30 seconds?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've added a comment and switched to assertHitCount. I don't think we need to increase timeout - we should have to wait for at most 5s for all ILM history items to be index
|
@elasticmachine update branch |
andreidan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
|
This was backported to |
This adds some protection in ILM history rollover test to remove its flakiness