Skip to content
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

Testing: Remove "past offset" from integration tests #12557

Open
Stebalien opened this issue Oct 4, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Testing: Remove "past offset" from integration tests #12557

Stebalien opened this issue Oct 4, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Stebalien
Copy link
Member

The integration tests appear to have a hack to backdate tipset timestamps:

pastOffset: 10000000 * time.Second, // time sufficiently in the past to trigger catch-up mining.

This breaks anything (e.g., F3) that relies on tipset timestamps. I assume there was a good reason for this, but it's absolutely the wrong way to go about this.

@Stebalien
Copy link
Member Author

Stebalien added a commit to filecoin-project/go-f3 that referenced this issue Oct 4, 2024
Unfortunately, due to
filecoin-project/lotus#12557, time in our
lotus tests is basically broken. So we start by relying on time but also
check the head so we don't switch too early.

This doesn't matter in practice, but I'd really like to be able to test
this in CI, fully integrated.
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit to filecoin-project/go-f3 that referenced this issue Oct 4, 2024
Unfortunately, due to
filecoin-project/lotus#12557, time in our
lotus tests is basically broken. So we start by relying on time but also
check the head so we don't switch too early.

This doesn't matter in practice, but I'd really like to be able to test
this in CI, fully integrated.
@rjan90
Copy link
Contributor

rjan90 commented Oct 8, 2024

2024-10-08:

This is potentially causing a lot of test flakiness, but we have worked us around that for now. It is a good item for someone that wants to get involved with how the system works, but will be time consuming and potentially not the easiest first issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: 🐱 Todo
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants