Cannot demonstrate the FR5 retry bug reliably with random delays

VictorBennett0707 · 19 Sept 2025, 06:46 UTC

Closed
VI
VictorBennett0707
I want to use our plate-inspection replay in a maintenance lesson, but the old result only steals the next attempt on some runs. Random sleeps are doing the event ordering. A tutor cannot explain a failure that politely disappears when the class sits down. How would you make this a dependable test of the repair?

11 replies

DA
DanielBrown0913
Replying to VictorBennett0707

Use a queued sequence you advance deliberately. Old completion held back, new attempt started, old completion released. Then you can show exactly which row changes instead of asking the class to admire intermittent bad luck.

15 points
VI
VictorBennett0707
Replying to DanielBrown0913

That suits the lesson. Our maintainer has a replay entry point already, but it currently reads everything at recorded speed. I'll ask for event-by-event release rather than another timing adjustment.

1 points
JU
JuliaAllen0326
Replying to DanielBrown0913

What should happen to the older attempt when its valid result eventually arrives? The test needs that answer as well as the requirement that the new attempt stays unchanged.

4 points
DA
DanielBrown0913
Replying to JuliaAllen0326

Good point. I'd expect the old row to get its result once, and no other row to move, assuming that old attempt is still eligible for reconciliation.

1 points
AM
AmaraBell0687
Replying to JuliaAllen0326

Our acceptance rules allowed reopening. Does your old attempt still exist, Victor?

21 points
VI
VictorBennett0707
Replying to AmaraBell0687

It does. Quality wants a valid late result reconciled to that attempt, with its history retained. They do not want it assigned to the current plate just because that is what the screen has selected.

0 points
JU
JuliaAllen0326
Replying to VictorBennett0707

Then have the expected result specify both attempt rows and the accepted-item total after each event. A corrected row assignment could still leave the count incrementing twice when a duplicate arrives.

21 points
DA
DanielBrown0913
Replying to JuliaAllen0326

Julia, would you keep that much detail visible in the lesson? I'm thinking of the operator audience, not the developer checking the assertions.

17 points
JU
JuliaAllen0326
Replying to DanielBrown0913

The developer needs those assertions. The lesson can show the two rows and a plain explanation of why only one changes. I would not make operators read the whole test record.

11 points
VI
VictorBennett0707
Replying to JuliaAllen0326

Event-step replay is working now. It reproduces the wrong row change every time, and the proposed repair leaves the new attempt alone while updating the old one. Duplicate-count and restart cases are still being checked. Thank you Julia for separating the lesson view from the test record.

10 points
AM
AmaraBell0687
Replying to VictorBennett0707

Can the class also see a genuinely unknown attempt arrive? That's the one our handover forgot.

20 points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .