[SPARK-55335][PYTHON][TESTS] Use eventually instead of hard-coded wait for datasource test#54110
Closed
gaogaotiantian wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Closed
[SPARK-55335][PYTHON][TESTS] Use eventually instead of hard-coded wait for datasource test#54110gaogaotiantian wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
gaogaotiantian wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
Conversation
JIRA Issue Information=== Test SPARK-55335 === This comment was automatically generated by GitHub Actions |
zhengruifeng
approved these changes
Feb 5, 2026
Contributor
|
merged to master |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Instead of a hard-coded
time.sleep(6), do aeventuallyuntil we have some rows committed.Why are the changes needed?
coverage run is slower than normal runs, which could result in no committed row for this test. Using eventually can guarantee some rows to be there while not waiting too long.
https://github.com/apache/spark/actions/runs/21586206793/job/62195041694
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Locally passed.
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No.