Skip to content
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

Fix AC key mangling for grpc server #593

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

amartani
Copy link
Contributor

#339 implemented AC key mangling based on instance name. However, that implementation missed applying the mangling logic on grpc UpdateActionResult method, causing cached entries to not match the ones fetched by GetActionResult. Correctly implement the feature on that method and add test to verify the new behavior.

buchgr#339 implemented AC key mangling based on instance name. However, that implementation missed applying the mangling logic on grpc UpdateActionResult method, causing cached entries to not match the ones fetched by GetActionResult. Correctly implement the feature on that method and add test to verify the new behavior.
Copy link
Collaborator

@mostynb mostynb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for fixing this- I merged your change with some minor reformatting of the commit message. I will follow up with some test refactoring in #594.

@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ func TestMain(m *testing.M) {
listener = bufconn.Listen(bufSize)

validateAC := true
mangleACKeys := false
mangleACKeys := true
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This now means that we aren't testing the regular non-mangled AC key case. I will refector the grpc tests in #594 to avoid this.

@mostynb mostynb closed this Oct 22, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants