Skip to content

itest: fix flake in address v2 test #1715

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

itest: fix flake in address v2 test #1715

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

guggero
Copy link
Member

@guggero guggero commented Aug 8, 2025

We always expect two events. So asserting for just one only worked when things ran very quickly and only the first one was persisted. Always waiting for two will fix this timing-dependent flake.

Fixes the flake observed here: https://github.com/lightninglabs/taproot-assets/actions/runs/16798226160/job/47573276733?pr=1713

We always expect two events. So asserting for just one only worked when
things ran very quickly and only the first one was persisted.
Always waiting for two will fix this timing-dependent flake.
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 16824188448

Details

  • 3 of 3 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • 71 unchanged lines in 14 files lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.05%) to 56.629%

Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
fn/context_guard.go 1 91.94%
asset/asset.go 2 80.23%
tapdb/mssmt.go 2 91.36%
tapdb/multiverse.go 2 81.4%
universe_rpc_diff.go 2 76.0%
universe/syncer.go 2 83.58%
itest/multisig.go 6 97.49%
tapdb/interfaces.go 6 82.5%
tapfreighter/chain_porter.go 6 81.75%
universe/archive.go 6 79.76%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 16818173014: -0.05%
Covered Lines: 60543
Relevant Lines: 106912

💛 - Coveralls

Copy link
Member

@jtobin jtobin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants