| StevenK | wgrant: https://code.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/auditorclient-timeline/+merge/171942 | 00:57 |
|---|---|---|
| wgrant | StevenK: Does that function correctly when given multiple objects, operations or actors? | 01:02 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Sprinkling an assert in the multiple test: reference = None | 01:03 |
| StevenK | actual = "Object: ['lp-development:Person:243653', 'lp-development:Person:243654']; Operation: ('person-deleted', 'person-undeleted'), Actor: None" | 01:03 |
| wgrant | Right | 01:03 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Do you want that assert left in, or you wanted to see it cope? | 01:04 |
| wgrant | Confused | 01:06 |
| wgrant | Oh, by "wanted to see it cope" you meant "wanted to see it as a one off"? | 01:06 |
| wgrant | I don't much care. | 01:06 |
| StevenK | Yes, I did | 01:06 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Could I get a review, then? | 01:17 |
| StevenK | Or have you been defeated by connection limits? | 01:17 |
| wgrant | s/connection limits/questions/ | 01:19 |
| wgrant | StevenK: We would ideally hook into auditorclient more directly, but this will do for now | 01:20 |
| wgrant | I think | 01:20 |
| wgrant | It might not actually work, though | 01:20 |
| wgrant | You should test | 01:20 |
| StevenK | Oh? | 01:21 |
| wgrant | The receive is also wrong | 01:21 |
| wgrant | The action should finish once auditorclient returns | 01:21 |
| wgrant | Not once everything is dereferenced | 01:21 |
| wgrant | Overlapping actions are generally a bad idea | 01:21 |
| StevenK | wgrant: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5806468/ | 01:23 |
| wgrant | StevenK: Right | 01:23 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Any other concerns? | 01:24 |
| wgrant | I don't believe so. | 01:25 |
| StevenK | wgrant: That MP has updated. | 01:33 |
| wgrant | And is now approved. | 01:39 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Thanks | 01:40 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Do you want to review https://code.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/export-pu-auditor/+merge/171460 then? | 04:11 |
| wgrant | StevenK: What happens if I reject, accept, reject, and then accept an upload? | 04:16 |
| StevenK | wgrant: The last event's actor will be returned | 04:21 |
| wgrant | StevenK: Are you sure? | 04:21 |
| wgrant | There's a limit=1 on the single receive call | 04:22 |
| wgrant | But that doesn't quite work for the bulk one | 04:22 |
| StevenK | Let me write a test | 04:26 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Right | 04:55 |
| StevenK | wgrant: Calling reject, accept, reject with 3 different users results in the following: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5806804/ | 04:57 |
| wgrant | StevenK: That shows that it happens to work at least sometimes | 05:07 |
| wgrant | I want to know whether it *should* work, or whether that's an accident. | 05:07 |
| === joeyfreenode is now known as joey | ||
| StevenK | wgrant: Adding sleeps between the reject, accept and reject also returns the same returns. | 05:18 |
| StevenK | Which shows that it isn't just working due to the 2 events having the same timestamp | 05:18 |
| StevenK | s/same returns/same results/ | 05:19 |
| wgrant | StevenK: That's not very strong evidence :) | 05:23 |
| wgrant | I'd really like to see eg. the request that goes to auditor, and the SQL behind it | 05:23 |
| wgrant | postgres will often return things in insert order initially on small tables | 05:23 |
| wgrant | Simply because of the likely physical layout | 05:23 |
| wgrant | I don't see how this works reliably, so I am inclined to believe it does not. | 05:23 |
| StevenK | wgrant: It's auditorfixture, so it's backed on sqlite | 05:24 |
| wgrant | s/postgres/sqlite/ | 05:24 |
| === tasdomas_afk is now known as tasdomas | ||
| === wedgwood_away is now known as wedgwood | ||
| === tasdomas is now known as tasdomas_afk | ||
| === frankban_ is now known as frankban | ||
| === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch | ||
| === matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara | ||
| === wedgwood is now known as wedgwood_away | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!