Skip to content

Conversation

@arthurschreiber
Copy link
Member

@arthurschreiber arthurschreiber commented Sep 26, 2025

Description

synctest is a new builtin go package that was marked as stable in 1.25. It allows execution of time based test (e.g. those that test timeouts via context etc) without actually spending time waiting for the given timeout to fire.

See the documentation at https://pkg.go.dev/testing/synctest and Testing concurrent code with testing/synctest for more information on how this works. Using this package for unit tests is pretty straightforward and painless, and has huge potential to improve test runtimes.

In this PR, I'm updating the vstream manager unit tests that effectively test passing time. Just wrapping these tests in synctest.Test yields a test execution time reduction of 97.5%.

Before

ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtgate	47.349s

After

ok  	vitess.io/vitess/go/vt/vtgate	1.171s

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • "Backport to:" labels have been added if this change should be back-ported to release branches
  • If this change is to be back-ported to previous releases, a justification is included in the PR description
  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on CI?
  • Documentation was added or is not required

Deployment Notes

AI Disclosure

@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Sep 26, 2025

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow needs to be marked as required, the maintainer team must be notified.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from vitess-operator and arewefastyet, if used there.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Sep 26, 2025
@arthurschreiber arthurschreiber changed the title test: showcase using sync test test: showcase using synctest Sep 26, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v23.0.0 milestone Sep 26, 2025
@arthurschreiber arthurschreiber added Type: Testing Type: Performance Component: General Changes throughout the code base and removed Type: Performance NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Sep 26, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 26, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 67.50%. Comparing base (be0c44f) to head (39705b4).
⚠️ Report is 69 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #18701      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   67.51%   67.50%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1608     1608              
  Lines      263594   263604      +10     
==========================================
- Hits       177973   177947      -26     
- Misses      85621    85657      +36     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Signed-off-by: Arthur Schreiber <[email protected]>
Base automatically changed from arthur/fix-callback-after-return to main September 29, 2025 21:05
@systay systay modified the milestones: v23.0.0, v24.0.0 Oct 8, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Nov 8, 2025

This PR is being marked as stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. To rectify, you may do any of the following:

  • Push additional commits to the associated branch.
  • Remove the stale label.
  • Add a comment indicating why it is not stale.

If no action is taken within 7 days, this PR will be closed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. and removed Stale Marks PRs as stale after a period of inactivity, which are then closed after a grace period. labels Nov 8, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Component: General Changes throughout the code base Type: Testing

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants