New submission from Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com>:
I just got a one-off, non-reproducible test_kqueue failure, during a 'make
test' of the trunk, on OS X 10.5.6. Here's the output:
test_kqueue
test test_kqueue failed -- Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/dickinsm/python_source/trunk/Lib/test/test_kqueue.py", line
136, in test_queue_event
(server.fileno(), select.KQ_FILTER_READ, flags)])
AssertionError: [(5L, -2, 5L), (6L, -2, 5L), (6L, -1, 5L)] != [(5, -2, 5),
(5, -1, 5), (6, -2, 5), (6, -1, 5)]
Looking at the test_queue.py file just before line 136, I see:
events = kq.control(None, 4, 1)
# We may need to call it several times
for i in range(5):
if len(events) == 4:
break
events = kq.control(None, 4, 1)
Would adding a time.sleep(1.0) to the for loop make this test more robust?
My first impression was that the '1' in 'kq.control(None, 4, 1)' already
did this; i.e., that it meant that the kq.control function would wait up
to 1 second for a response, but that doesn't seem to be true. I tried
replacing the 1 with 1000000 and the test still runs nearly
instantaneously, even in the case where the kq.control call doesn't get 4
events first time around.
Out of curiosity, *why* is there a need to call this several times? I
fully believe there *is* such a need; I just don't know what it is.
Something to do with waiting for the socket send calls to complete, I
assume?
----------
assignee: christian.heimes
components: Tests
messages: 80335
nosy: christian.heimes, marketdickinson
severity: normal
status: open
title: test_kqueue failure on OS X
versions: Python 2.6
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue5025>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
