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: use correct interruption condition in StartCachePopulatorThread #5732

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 27, 2023

Conversation

UdjinM6
Copy link

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 commented Nov 26, 2023

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

#4788 (comment)

noticed while working on #5731

What was done?

How Has This Been Tested?

run a node, check logs - there is a meaningful time span between start and done now and not just zeros all the time.

Breaking Changes

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have assigned this pull request to a milestone (for repository code-owners and collaborators only)

@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 added this to the 20.1 milestone Nov 26, 2023
@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 marked this pull request as ready for review November 26, 2023 13:42
Copy link
Collaborator

@ogabrielides ogabrielides left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, utACK

Copy link
Member

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK for squash merge; but shouldn't we have a regression test for this?

@UdjinM6
Copy link
Author

UdjinM6 commented Nov 27, 2023

utACK for squash merge; but shouldn't we have a regression test for this?

It's just a typo/copy-paste mistake in the preliminary cacheing logic. Not sure how we would test it.. Any suggestions?

Copy link
Collaborator

@knst knst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

utACK

@PastaPastaPasta PastaPastaPasta merged commit 6c57cc2 into dashpay:develop Nov 27, 2023
8 checks passed
ogabrielides pushed a commit to ogabrielides/dash that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
dashpay#5732)

## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
dashpay#4788 (comment)

noticed while working on dashpay#5731

## What was done?

## How Has This Been Tested?
run a node, check logs - there is a meaningful time span between `start`
and `done` now and not just zeros all the time.

## Breaking Changes

## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e
tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository
code-owners and collaborators only)_
@UdjinM6 UdjinM6 modified the milestones: 20.1, 20.0.2 Dec 4, 2023
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.

4 participants