Skip to content

Fix flaky daemon log test on Windows #3898

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
epeicher merged 4 commits into from
Jun 19, 2026
+20 −12
Merged

Fix flaky daemon log test on Windows #3898

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
eed7731
Fix flaky daemon log test on Windows by polling for flushed output
epeicher Jun 19, 2026
c8aba10
Retry the log assertion directly instead of double-checking content
epeicher Jun 19, 2026
ef7b020
Use Vitest's built-in vi.waitFor instead of a hand-rolled poller
epeicher Jun 19, 2026
d3b75dc
Reword log-poll comment to explain the current code
epeicher Jun 19, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
32 changes: 20 additions & 12 deletions apps/cli/tests/daemon.test.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -123,18 +123,26 @@ describe( 'ProcessManagerDaemon', () => {
2,
'0'
) }${ String( now.getDate() ).padStart( 2, '0' ) }`;
expect(
fs.readFileSync(
path.join( tmpDir, 'logs', `${ testProcessName }-out-${ dateTag }.log` ),
'utf8'
)
).toContain( 'fixture-stdout' );
expect(
fs.readFileSync(
path.join( tmpDir, 'logs', `${ testProcessName }-error-${ dateTag }.log` ),
'utf8'
)
).toContain( 'fixture-stderr' );
// The daemon pipes child output through readline into a buffered WriteStream, so the
// bytes reach disk several async hops after we write them. Poll until the output
// lands; the flush can lag on slower agents (notably Windows CI).
await vi.waitFor(
() => {
expect(
fs.readFileSync(
path.join( tmpDir, 'logs', `${ testProcessName }-out-${ dateTag }.log` ),
'utf8'
)
).toContain( 'fixture-stdout' );
expect(
fs.readFileSync(
path.join( tmpDir, 'logs', `${ testProcessName }-error-${ dateTag }.log` ),
'utf8'
)
).toContain( 'fixture-stderr' );
},
{ timeout: 2000 }

@wojtekn wojtekn Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: we use a default polling interval of 50ms. Would it make sense to use a longer one?

@epeicher epeicher Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This value is the total time the test will wait for the expectation to pass before failing, the polling interval for the waitFor has a default of 50 ms docs here so that's coherent with existing functionality.

@wojtekn wojtekn Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, the question was whether we need to poll every 50ms.

@epeicher epeicher Jun 19, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ahms, sorry I misunderstood. I actually don't know, but I think this should be completed in ms so 50 seems reasonable, do you think we should it increase it to maybe 100ms? I don't mind either case.

);
} );

it( 'includes captured stderr in the exit event payload', async () => {
Expand Down