| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Hang all timer lists off a single TimerWrap and use the PriorityQueue
to manage expiration priorities. This makes the Timers code clearer,
consumes significantly less resources and improves performance.
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/20555
Fixes: https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/16105
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
|
|
This commit adds a mustNotCall() helper for testing. This provides
an alternative to using common.fail() as a callback, or creating
a callback function for the sole purpose of calling common.fail().
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/11152
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <santiago.gimeno@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Yuta Hiroto <hello@about-hiroppy.com>
|
|
test-timers-same-timeout-wrong-list-deleted was flaky under load because
there is no guarantee that a timer will fire within a given period of
time. It had an exit handler that checked that the process was finishing
in less than twice as much as a timer was set for. Under load, the
timer could take over 200ms to fire even if it was set for 100ms, so
this was causing the test to be flaky on CI from time to time.
However, that timing check is unnecessary to identify the regression
that the test was written for. When run with a version of Node.js that
does not contain the fix that accompanied the test in its initial
commit, an assertion indicating that there were still timers in the
active timer list fired. So, this commit removes the exit handler timing
check and relies on the existing robust active timers list length check.
This allows us to move the test back to parallel because it does not
seem to fail under load anymore.
The test was refactored slightly, removing duplicated code to a
function, using `assert.strictEqual()` instead of `assert.equal()`,
changing a 10ms timer to 1ms, and improving the messages provided by
assertions.
Fixes: https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/8459
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/10362
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
|
|
Remove unneeded timers from some tests and move others from parallel
testing to sequential testing.
This is to resolve test failures on freebsd10-64 on CI. The failures
are all due to timers firing later than expected. Timers firing later
than they are set for can happen on resource-constrained hosts and is
not a bug.
In general, it may be wise to put tests that depend on timing into
sequential testing rather than parallel testing, as the timing can
be affected by other simultaneously-running test processes.
Fixes: https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/8041
Fixes: https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/9227
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/9317
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Julien Gilli <jgilli@nodejs.org>
Reviewed-By: Johan Bergstrom <bugs@bergstroem.nu>
Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <santiago.gimeno@gmail.com>
|
|
For nested timers with the same timeout, we can get into a situation
where we have recreated a timer list immediately before we need to
clean up an old timer list with the same key. Fix: make sure the list
to be deleted is the same instance as the list whose reference was used
to determine that a cleanup is necessary. If it's not the same instance,
a new list with the same key has been created, and it should not be
deleted.
Fixes: https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/7722
PR-URL: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/7827
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Julien Gilli <jgilli@fastmail.fm>
|
