[Test] Guard against "about-to-be-deleted" token document #91071
Conversation
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
The PR introduces a waiting for token invalidation similar to the fix for elastic#67347 and elastic#64757. It targets access token instead of the refresh token. But the underlying cause is the same because invalidation of both token types are at least a 2-step process: (1) find the document and (2) delete the document. In the first step, a document can be found by either search or get when it is about to be deleted and this results to missingDocument exception in step 2. The intention of the particular test does not really care about this situation. Its main purpose is to ensure nothing gets invalidated when the requested token does not exist (deleted). Hence the PR just adds a wait to ensure temporary inconsistent condition eventually goes away. Resolves: elastic#90509
ywangd
added
>test
Collaborator
|
Pinging @elastic/es-security (Team:Security) |
ywangd
added a commit
to ywangd/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 25, 2022
) The PR introduces a waiting for token invalidation similar to the fix for elastic#67347 and elastic#64757. It targets access token instead of the refresh token. But the underlying cause is the same because invalidation of both token types are at least a 2-step process: (1) find the document and (2) delete the document. In the first step, a document can be found by either search or get when it is about to be deleted and this results to missingDocument exception in step 2. The intention of the particular test does not really care about this situation. Its main purpose is to ensure nothing gets invalidated when the requested token does not exist (deleted). Hence the PR just adds a wait to ensure temporary inconsistent condition eventually goes away. Resolves: elastic#90509
elasticsearchmachine
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 25, 2022
…91103) The PR introduces a waiting for token invalidation similar to the fix for #67347 and #64757. It targets access token instead of the refresh token. But the underlying cause is the same because invalidation of both token types are at least a 2-step process: (1) find the document and (2) delete the document. In the first step, a document can be found by either search or get when it is about to be deleted and this results to missingDocument exception in step 2. The intention of the particular test does not really care about this situation. Its main purpose is to ensure nothing gets invalidated when the requested token does not exist (deleted). Hence the PR just adds a wait to ensure temporary inconsistent condition eventually goes away. Resolves: #90509
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.
The PR introduces a waiting for token invalidation similar to the fix for #67347 and #64757. It targets access token instead of the refresh token. But the underlying cause is the same because invalidation of both token types are at least a 2-step process: (1) find the document and (2) delete the document. In the first step, a document can be found by either search or get when it is about to be deleted and this results to missingDocument exception in step 2. The intention of the particular test does not really care about this situation. Its main purpose is to ensure nothing gets invalidated when the requested token does not exist (deleted). Hence the PR just adds a wait to ensure temporary inconsistent condition eventually goes away.
Resolves: #90509