Fix flaky test in RumEventDeserializer#1727
Merged
Merged
Conversation
0xnm
approved these changes
Nov 16, 2023
xgouchet
force-pushed
the
xgouchet/flaky/RumEventDeserializer
branch
from
November 16, 2023 14:46
5fe046a to
1874646
Compare
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #1727 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 83.31% 83.36% +0.05%
===========================================
Files 465 465
Lines 16125 16122 -3
Branches 2395 2394 -1
===========================================
+ Hits 13434 13439 +5
- Misses 2038 2039 +1
+ Partials 653 644 -9 |
mariusc83
approved these changes
Nov 16, 2023
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
4 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What does this PR do?
Fix a flaky test in the RumEventDeserializer.
The test generates random
usr.*attributes in a RUM event, then serialize and deserialize it and compare with the original one. An issue can arise if one of the random attributes uses a known key name (i.e.id,name,email), as on serialization it would conflict and wouldn't be recoverred via deserialization.Additional Notes
I also "fixed" this in other ForgeryFactory implementations that could one day cause flakyness in the tests