[Persistence] Adds atomic Update for TreeStore #861
Conversation
dylanlott
added
persistence
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
from
3f68ff0
to
2d9022f
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
from
7ee9be3
to
6030ada
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
from
6030ada
to
a7ba81a
Compare
persistence/trees/trees_test.go
Outdated
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // createMockBus returns a mock bus with stubbed out functions for bus registration | ||
| func createMockBus(t *testing.T, runtimeMgr modules.RuntimeMgr) *mockModules.MockBus { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
NIT: I would consider moving all these helpers to a file named trees_utils_test.go
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd rather create an issue with a TECHDEBT comment. There's no easy answer to this without answering larger questions around import cycles and how modules should be imported.
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
2 times, most recently
from
26b1e44
to
ef4ed4d
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
from
ef4ed4d
to
be56f6a
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/tree-store-submodule
branch
from
3741a01
to
7165f7c
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
from
be56f6a
to
f0c6203
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/tree-store-submodule
branch
from
7165f7c
to
6181db1
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1cfec18
to
2d53dc1
Compare
dylanlott
force-pushed
the
persistence/savepoints-initial
branch
from
29ad7df
to
0f87f0b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A few last minute nits and then it should be g2g.
@dylanlott Can you please merge with main and resolve conflicts to avoid a force push? It allows the reviewer to review changes since last review. Ty!
| //go:build test | ||
|
|
||
| package trees |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In persistence/trees/trees_test.go, we use package trees_test and not have the //go:build test tag.
Here, we have the package trees and do have the //go:build test tag.
Feels inconsistent, but not sure if this is general best practice for main_test.go` vs non-main test files?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was following the prescription of TestUtils for testing unexported members like previously discussed.
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO_AFTER(#861): Implement this test with the test suite available in #861 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
test suite available in #861 is this correct?
We want to use the test suite in this PR to implement it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe that's what @h5law meant out of this, yes.
| nodeStore: nodeStore, | ||
| } | ||
| // TECHDEBT(#796): Test helpers should be consolidated in a single place | ||
| func newTestApp(t *testing.T) *core_types.Actor { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OPTIONAL: Per @h5law's comment, we could move the helpers into a separate utils_test.go but don't feel strongly about it.
Co-authored-by: Daniel Olshansky <[email protected]>
Description
Adds atomic savepoint and rollback creation to the TreeStore
Issue
Relates to #562
Type of change
Please mark the relevant option(s):
List of changes
Testing
make develop_test; if any code changes were mademake test_e2eon k8s LocalNet; if any code changes were madee2e-devnet-testpasses tests on DevNet; if any code was changedRequired Checklist
godocformat comments on touched members (see: tip.golang.org/doc/comment)If Applicable Checklist
shared/docs/*if I updatedshared/*README(s)