Repository navigation
test(concurrency): Order the calc-reader test's runs with events instead of sleep durations - #2562
Merged
schloerke merged 1 commit intoOct 15, 2026
Conversation
…ead of sleep durations
schloerke
merged commit Oct 15, 2026
9530e37
into
schloerke/2508-stack-review-fixes
174 checks passed
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Follow-up to #2552.
test_async_calc_reader_waits_for_the_latest_runordered its three calc runs withasyncio.sleep(0.05)/0.15/0.01delays, so on a slow CI machine the "stale run finishes first" interleaving it exists to check was not guaranteed. The runs are now gated byasyncio.Events: run A is released first while run B is still in progress with a waiting reader, which pins the interleaving deterministically. The test also waits for the round thatv.set(2)requested before returning.A review had attributed a
Task was destroyed but it is pending!line to this test; it did not reproduce in isolated runs, so that is not what this change addresses.