🧹 chore: Improve Retry addon tests coverage #3526
Conversation
WalkthroughNew unit tests were introduced for the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Test
participant ConfigDefault
participant DefaultConfig
Test->>ConfigDefault: Call with no args
ConfigDefault->>DefaultConfig: Return DefaultConfig
Test->>ConfigDefault: Call with custom config
ConfigDefault-->>Test: Return custom config
Test->>ConfigDefault: Call with partial/invalid config
ConfigDefault->>DefaultConfig: Return DefaultConfig
sequenceDiagram
participant Test
participant ExponentialBackoff
participant RandReader
Test->>RandReader: Replace with failingReader
Test->>ExponentialBackoff: Call next()
ExponentialBackoff->>RandReader: Read random bytes (fails)
ExponentialBackoff-->>Test: Return max backoff, no interval update
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (8)
✨ Finishing Touches
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
SupportNeed help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions. Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @gaby, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request focuses on enhancing the test suite for the retry mechanism by adding new coverage for configuration defaults and custom settings, as well as introducing a specific test case to handle failures in random number generation within the exponential backoff logic.
Highlights
- Retry Configuration Testing: Added a new test file (
addon/retry/config_test.go) to provide comprehensive test coverage for theconfigDefaultfunction, ensuring correct behavior for default, custom, and partially/negatively configured retry settings. - Exponential Backoff Randomness Test: Introduced a new test case (
Test_ExponentialBackoff_NextRandFailure) inaddon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.goto verify theExponentialBackoffbehavior when the underlying random number generator fails, ensuring it correctly falls back toMaxBackoffTimeand preserves thecurrentInterval.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
gaby
changed the title
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3526 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 84.62% 84.72% +0.09%
==========================================
Files 120 120
Lines 12286 12286
==========================================
+ Hits 10397 10409 +12
+ Misses 1487 1474 -13
- Partials 402 403 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
addon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.go (1)
111-113: Loop construct prevents compilation
rangecannot be used on anint.
Current form:for i := range tt.expBackoff.MaxRetryCount {fails to compile. Replace with an index-based loop:
-for i := range tt.expBackoff.MaxRetryCount { +for i := 0; i < tt.expBackoff.MaxRetryCount; i++ {
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
addon/retry/config_test.go(1 hunks)addon/retry/exponential_backoff_test.go(2 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (8)
- GitHub Check: Analyse
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-13)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, macos-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, windows-latest)
- GitHub Check: unit (1.24.x, ubuntu-latest)
- GitHub Check: repeated
- GitHub Check: Compare
- GitHub Check: lint
🔇 Additional comments (1)
addon/retry/config_test.go (1)
10-14: Solid coverage of default-config pathThe test accurately asserts that
configDefault()returnsDefaultConfigwhen no custom options are supplied.
No issues spotted.
Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️
Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.50.
| Benchmark suite | Current: d011772 | Previous: a35c5d2 | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
Benchmark_GenericParseTypeBytes/benchmark_genericParseTypeBytes#01 |
33.49 ns/op 8 B/op 1 allocs/op |
20.27 ns/op 8 B/op 1 allocs/op |
1.65 |
Benchmark_GenericParseTypeBytes/benchmark_genericParseTypeBytes#01 - ns/op |
33.49 ns/op |
20.27 ns/op |
1.65 |
This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.
Summary
addon/retrynow has 100% test coverage.