-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.4k
[test] Fix flaky data source aggregation test (take 3) #17316
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
[test] Fix flaky data source aggregation test (take 3) #17316
Conversation
Deploy preview: https://deploy-preview-17316--material-ui-x.netlify.app/ |
@@ -104,6 +104,8 @@ describeSkipIf(isJSDOM)('<DataGridPremium /> - Data source aggregation', () => { | |||
expect(fetchRowsSpy.callCount).to.be.greaterThan(0); | |||
}); | |||
await user.click(within(getColumnHeaderCell(0)).getByLabelText('id column menu')); | |||
// wait for the column menu to be open first | |||
await screen.findByRole('menu', { name: 'id column menu' }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What a nasty test to fix 😅
Do you think this will make any difference?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm no longer sure... 🤷
It's hard to debug it when locally it's impossible to get a failure. 🙈
But at least on Pickers, I often tend to first assert that a Popper has been attached and only then do the actual assertion. 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The popper tests are extremely frustrating to test. There is no exact reason why they fail as far as I could tell
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And it failed once again... 🤷
@MBilalShafi thank you for pitching it. 🙏 However, I haven't seen this test acting flaky lately, maybe we should wait for an indicator that it is still flaky..? 🤷 |
I guess it doesn't do any harm to merge it as it could reproduce again since the factor causing flakiness ("async" behavior of |
Gotcha. Could I get approval on the PR? 🤔 |
Follow up on #17311.
Seems to still be failing. 🙈 🤷
https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/mui/mui-x/88253/workflows/cfe4f5a8-dac0-4fac-a889-acb5e84b3044/jobs/509320