Skip to content

Conversation

@teskje
Copy link
Contributor

@teskje teskje commented Nov 28, 2025

This test previously documented the current wrong behavior. It looks like that behavior has since been fixed by #31152, and this is a regression test instead. Update its documentation accordingly.

Motivation

  • This PR fixes a recognized bug.

Closes https://github.com/materializeInc/database-issues/issues/8842

Tips for reviewer

This test is known to be flaky: https://github.com/MaterializeInc/database-issues/issues/9933. There is no reason to believe that this change fixes the flake.

Checklist

  • This PR has adequate test coverage / QA involvement has been duly considered. (trigger-ci for additional test/nightly runs)
  • This PR has an associated up-to-date design doc, is a design doc (template), or is sufficiently small to not require a design.
  • If this PR evolves an existing $T ⇔ Proto$T mapping (possibly in a backwards-incompatible way), then it is tagged with a T-proto label.
  • If this PR will require changes to cloud orchestration or tests, there is a companion cloud PR to account for those changes that is tagged with the release-blocker label (example).
  • If this PR includes major user-facing behavior changes, I have pinged the relevant PM to schedule a changelog post.

This test previously documented the current wrong behavior. It looks
like that behavior has now been fixed, and this is a regression test
instead. Update its documentation accordingly.
@teskje teskje requested a review from def- November 28, 2025 10:35
@teskje teskje merged commit 737aa49 into MaterializeInc:main Nov 28, 2025
21 checks passed
@teskje teskje deleted the test-constant-sink-regression-test branch November 28, 2025 11:42
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.

2 participants