-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
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
Enhancements for RANGE tests #805
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Evgeniy Zayats <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Evgeniy Zayats <[email protected]>
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.
Range overflow test?
As I remember there are some tests about it already, but @evgeniiz321, can prove it. |
file_ranges_to_test.append((0, parts[0][1] + parts[1][1] - 1)) | ||
# range requires more than two children (it includes OR does not include the first and the last children) | ||
file_ranges_to_test.append((0, complex_object_size - 1)) | ||
file_ranges_to_test.append((parts[0][1] + 1, complex_object_size - parts[0][1] - parts[-1][1] - 1)) |
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.
looks working correctly but really relies on the fact that there will always be more than two parts, not sure if it is error-proof
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.
With the current settings there always will be more than two parts. If in the future we will update something, we will update this accordingly. Making an error-proof test usually is a waste of time.
4e73ea6
to
01583a9
Compare
Yes, we already have it in negative scenarios. |
closes #758 Signed-off-by: Evgeniy Zayats <[email protected]>
f32138d
to
11563ab
Compare
No description provided.