Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(940)

Issues Search
    My Issues | Starred     Open | Closed | All

Unified Diff: sync/engine/syncer_unittest.cc

Issue 10006046: Abort sync cycles when download step fails (Closed) Base URL: svn://svn.chromium.org/chrome/trunk/src
Patch Set: Retry on migration done responses Created 8 years, 8 months ago
Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.
Jump to:
View side-by-side diff with in-line comments
Download patch
« no previous file with comments | « sync/engine/syncer.cc ('k') | sync/sessions/status_controller.h » ('j') | no next file with comments »
Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Show Comments Hide Comments ('s')
Index: sync/engine/syncer_unittest.cc
diff --git a/sync/engine/syncer_unittest.cc b/sync/engine/syncer_unittest.cc
index 1d8cbb0ea9355f6f7715419bf04edc07032e5786..b2d694ed4b1c5e7cb7a6b42df8219bf135db8e72 100644
--- a/sync/engine/syncer_unittest.cc
+++ b/sync/engine/syncer_unittest.cc
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
#include "sync/engine/syncer_util.h"
#include "sync/engine/syncproto.h"
#include "sync/engine/traffic_recorder.h"
+#include "sync/engine/sync_scheduler.h"
#include "sync/protocol/bookmark_specifics.pb.h"
#include "sync/protocol/nigori_specifics.pb.h"
#include "sync/protocol/preference_specifics.pb.h"
@@ -186,18 +187,33 @@ class SyncerTest : public testing::Test,
info, workers);
}
- bool SyncShareAsDelegate() {
+ bool SyncShareAsDelegate(
+ SyncScheduler::SyncSessionJob::SyncSessionJobPurpose purpose) {
+ SyncerStep start;
+ SyncerStep end;
+ SyncScheduler::SetSyncerStepsForPurpose(purpose, &start, &end);
+
session_.reset(MakeSession());
- syncer_->SyncShare(session_.get(), SYNCER_BEGIN, SYNCER_END);
+ syncer_->SyncShare(session_.get(), start, end);
return session_->HasMoreToSync();
}
+ bool SyncShareNudge() {
+ session_.reset(MakeSession());
+ return SyncShareAsDelegate(SyncScheduler::SyncSessionJob::NUDGE);
+ }
+
+ bool SyncShareConfigure() {
+ session_.reset(MakeSession());
+ return SyncShareAsDelegate(SyncScheduler::SyncSessionJob::CONFIGURATION);
+ }
+
void LoopSyncShare() {
bool should_loop = false;
int loop_iterations = 0;
do {
ASSERT_LT(++loop_iterations, 100) << "infinite loop detected. please fix";
- should_loop = SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ should_loop = SyncShareNudge();
} while (should_loop);
}
@@ -542,7 +558,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsCommandTruncates) {
// Create two server entries.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(ids_.MakeServer("x"), root, "X", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(ids_.MakeServer("w"), root, "W", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Create some new client entries.
CreateUnsyncedDirectory("C", ids_.MakeLocal("c"));
@@ -596,7 +612,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersThrottledEntries) {
AddDefaultFieldValue(syncable::BOOKMARKS, &bookmark_data);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -611,7 +627,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersThrottledEntries) {
context_->SetUnthrottleTime(
throttled_types,
base::TimeTicks::Now() + base::TimeDelta::FromSeconds(1200));
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// Nothing should have been committed as bookmarks is throttled.
@@ -625,7 +641,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersThrottledEntries) {
context_->SetUnthrottleTime(
throttled_types,
base::TimeTicks::Now() - base::TimeDelta::FromSeconds(1200));
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// It should have been committed.
ReadTransaction rtrans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -665,7 +681,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersUnreadyEntries) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "B", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(3, 0, "C", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(4, 0, "D", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Server side change will put A in conflict.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A", 20, 20);
{
@@ -708,7 +724,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersUnreadyEntries) {
D.Put(SPECIFICS, encrypted_bookmark);
D.Put(NON_UNIQUE_NAME, "not encrypted");
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// We remove any unready entries from the status controller's unsynced
// handles, so this should remain 0 even though the entries didn't commit.
@@ -725,7 +741,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersUnreadyEntries) {
// Resolve the pending keys.
cryptographer(&rtrans)->DecryptPendingKeys(other_params);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// 2 unsynced handles to reflect the items that committed succesfully.
EXPECT_EQ(2U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
@@ -754,7 +770,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetCommitIdsFiltersUnreadyEntries) {
D.Put(SPECIFICS, encrypted_bookmark);
D.Put(NON_UNIQUE_NAME, kEncryptedString);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// We attempted to commit two items.
EXPECT_EQ(2U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
@@ -805,7 +821,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateSpecifics(2, 1, "B", 10, 10, false, 2, bookmark);
mock_server_->AddUpdateSpecifics(3, 1, "C", 10, 10, false, 1, bookmark);
mock_server_->AddUpdateSpecifics(4, 0, "D", 10, 10, false, 0, pref);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
EXPECT_EQ(0U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
// Initial state. Everything is normal.
@@ -826,7 +842,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
encrypted_bookmark);
mock_server_->AddUpdateSpecifics(4, 0, kEncryptedString, 20, 20, false, 0,
encrypted_pref);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
EXPECT_EQ(0U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
// All should be unapplied due to being undecryptable and have a valid
@@ -847,7 +863,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
// Item 3 doesn't change.
mock_server_->AddUpdateSpecifics(4, 0, kEncryptedString, 30, 30, false, 0,
encrypted_pref);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
EXPECT_EQ(0U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
// Items 1, 2, and 4 should have newer server versions, 3 remains the same.
@@ -866,7 +882,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
// Reordered to after item 2.
mock_server_->AddUpdateSpecifics(3, 1, kEncryptedString, 30, 30, false, 3,
encrypted_bookmark);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
EXPECT_EQ(0U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
// Items 2 and 4 should be the only ones with BASE_SERVER_SPECIFICS set.
@@ -902,7 +918,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
D.Put(NON_UNIQUE_NAME, kEncryptedString);
D.Put(IS_UNSYNCED, true);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
EXPECT_EQ(0U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
// Item 1 remains unsynced due to there being pending keys.
@@ -920,7 +936,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
cryptographer(&rtrans)->DecryptPendingKeys(key_params);
}
// First cycle resolves conflicts, second cycle commits changes.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(2, session_->status_controller().syncer_status().
num_server_overwrites);
EXPECT_EQ(1, session_->status_controller().syncer_status().
@@ -928,7 +944,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EncryptionAwareConflicts) {
// We attempted to commit item 1.
EXPECT_EQ(1U, session_->status_controller().unsynced_handles().size());
EXPECT_TRUE(session_->status_controller().did_commit_items());
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// Everything should be resolved now. The local changes should have
// overwritten the server changes for 2 and 4, while the server changes
@@ -973,7 +989,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ReceiveOldNigori) {
sync_pb::EntitySpecifics initial_nigori_specifics;
initial_nigori_specifics.mutable_nigori();
mock_server_->SetNigori(1, 10, 10, initial_nigori_specifics);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// Set up the current nigori node (containing both keys and encrypt
@@ -1000,7 +1016,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ReceiveOldNigori) {
cryptographer(&wtrans)->GetEncryptedTypes()));
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // Commit it.
+ SyncShareNudge(); // Commit it.
// Now set up the old nigori node and add it as a server update.
sync_pb::EntitySpecifics old_nigori_specifics;
@@ -1009,7 +1025,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ReceiveOldNigori) {
other_cryptographer.UpdateNigoriFromEncryptedTypes(old_nigori);
mock_server_->SetNigori(1, 30, 30, old_nigori_specifics);
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // Download the old nigori and apply it.
+ SyncShareNudge(); // Download the old nigori and apply it.
{
// Ensure everything is committed and stable now. The cryptographer
@@ -1058,7 +1074,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NigoriConflicts) {
our_encrypted_specifics.mutable_bookmark()->set_title("title2");
// Receive the initial nigori node.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
encrypted_types = syncable::ModelTypeSet::All();
{
// Local changes with different passphrase, different types, and sync_tabs.
@@ -1099,8 +1115,8 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NigoriConflicts) {
// data (with priority given to the server's encryption keys if they are
// undecryptable), which we then commit. The cryptographer should have pending
// keys and merge the set of encrypted types.
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // Resolve conflict in this cycle.
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // Commit local change in this cycle.
+ SyncShareNudge(); // Resolve conflict in this cycle.
+ SyncShareNudge(); // Commit local change in this cycle.
{
// Ensure the nigori data merged (encrypted types, sync_tabs).
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -1130,7 +1146,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NigoriConflicts) {
nigori_entry.Put(IS_UNSYNCED, true);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// Ensure everything is committed and stable now. The cryptographer
// should be able to decrypt both sets of keys, sync_tabs should be true,
@@ -1719,11 +1735,11 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UpdateWithZeroLengthName) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "", 1, 10);
// And one legal one that we're going to delete.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "FOO", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Delete the legal one. The new update has a null name.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "", 2, 20);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateDeleted();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
}
TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestBasicUpdate) {
@@ -1734,7 +1750,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestBasicUpdate) {
int64 timestamp = 10;
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(id, parent_id, name, version, timestamp);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
Entry entry(&trans, GET_BY_ID,
@@ -1912,7 +1928,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitTimeRename) {
// Mix in a directory creation too for later.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "dir_in_root", 10, 10);
mock_server_->SetCommitTimeRename("renamed_");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Verify it was correctly renamed.
{
@@ -1953,7 +1969,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitTimeRenameI18N) {
}
mock_server_->SetCommitTimeRename(i18nString);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Verify it was correctly renamed.
{
@@ -2033,7 +2049,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitReuniteUpdateAdjustsChildren) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
// Alright! Apply that update!
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// The folder's ID should have been updated.
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -2099,7 +2115,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitReuniteUpdate) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
// Alright! Apply that update!
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry entry(&trans, GET_BY_HANDLE, entry_metahandle);
@@ -2162,7 +2178,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitReuniteUpdateDoesNotChokeOnDeletedLocalEntry) {
}
// Just don't CHECK fail in sync, have the update split.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Id new_entry_id = GetOnlyEntryWithName(
@@ -2182,7 +2198,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ConflictMatchingEntryHandlesUnsanitizedNames) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A/A", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "B/B", 10, 10);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -2222,7 +2238,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ConflictMatchingEntryHandlesNormalNames) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "B", 10, 10);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -2326,7 +2342,7 @@ TEST_F(EntryCreatedInNewFolderTest, EntryCreatedInNewFolderMidSync) {
TEST_F(SyncerTest, NegativeIDInUpdate) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(-10, 0, "bad", 40, 40);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The negative id would make us CHECK!
}
@@ -2342,7 +2358,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UnappliedUpdateOnCreatedItemItemDoesNotCrash) {
WriteTestDataToEntry(&trans, &fred_match);
}
// Commit it.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1u, mock_server_->committed_ids().size());
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
syncable::Id fred_match_id;
@@ -2358,7 +2374,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UnappliedUpdateOnCreatedItemItemDoesNotCrash) {
}
// Run the syncer.
for (int i = 0 ; i < 30 ; ++i) {
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
}
}
@@ -2421,7 +2437,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitsUpdateDoesntAlterEntry) {
entry.Put(syncable::MTIME, test_time);
entry_metahandle = entry.Get(META_HANDLE);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
syncable::Id id;
int64 version;
int64 server_position_in_parent;
@@ -2440,7 +2456,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitsUpdateDoesntAlterEntry) {
EXPECT_EQ(root_id_.GetServerId(), update->parent_id_string());
EXPECT_EQ(version, update->version());
EXPECT_EQ(server_position_in_parent, update->position_in_parent());
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry entry(&trans, syncable::GET_BY_ID, id);
@@ -2475,9 +2491,9 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ParentAndChildBothMatch) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(parent_id, root_id_, "Folder", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(child_id, parent_id, "test.htm", 10, 10);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
+ SyncShareNudge();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Directory::ChildHandles children;
@@ -2502,7 +2518,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommittingNewDeleted) {
entry.Put(IS_UNSYNCED, true);
entry.Put(IS_DEL, true);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0u, mock_server_->committed_ids().size());
}
@@ -2585,7 +2601,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DeletingEntryWithLocalEdits) {
int64 newfolder_metahandle;
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry newfolder(&trans, CREATE, ids_.FromNumber(1), "local");
@@ -2608,10 +2624,10 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DeletingEntryWithLocalEdits) {
TEST_F(SyncerTest, FolderSwapUpdate) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(7801, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1024, 0, "fred", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1024, 0, "bob", 2, 20);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(7801, 0, "fred", 2, 20);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry id1(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(7801));
@@ -2630,7 +2646,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NameCollidingFolderSwapWorksFine) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(7801, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1024, 0, "fred", 1, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(4096, 0, "alice", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry id1(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(7801));
@@ -2649,7 +2665,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NameCollidingFolderSwapWorksFine) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1024, 0, "bob", 2, 20);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(7801, 0, "fred", 2, 20);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(4096, 0, "bob", 2, 20);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry id1(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(7801));
@@ -2683,7 +2699,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, CommitManyItemsInOneGo) {
}
}
uint32 num_loops = 0;
- while (SyncShareAsDelegate()) {
+ while (SyncShareNudge()) {
num_loops++;
ASSERT_LT(num_loops, max_batches * 2);
}
@@ -2708,7 +2724,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, HugeConflict) {
last_id = next_id;
}
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Check they're in the expected conflict state.
{
@@ -2725,7 +2741,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, HugeConflict) {
// Add the missing parent directory.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(parent_id, TestIdFactory::root(),
"BOB", 2, 20);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Now they should all be OK.
{
@@ -2741,7 +2757,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, HugeConflict) {
TEST_F(SyncerTest, DontCrashOnCaseChange) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry e(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1));
@@ -2750,22 +2766,22 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DontCrashOnCaseChange) {
}
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "BOB", 2, 20);
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // USED TO CAUSE AN ASSERT
+ SyncShareNudge(); // USED TO CAUSE AN ASSERT
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
}
TEST_F(SyncerTest, UnsyncedItemAndUpdate) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "bob", 2, 20);
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // USED TO CAUSE AN ASSERT
+ SyncShareNudge(); // USED TO CAUSE AN ASSERT
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
}
TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "Foo.htm", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
int64 local_folder_handle;
syncable::Id local_folder_id;
{
@@ -2782,7 +2798,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath) {
}
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "Bar.htm", 20, 20);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
{
// Update #20 should have been dropped in favor of the local version.
@@ -2801,13 +2817,13 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath) {
}
// Allow local changes to commit.
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(false);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
// Now add a server change to make the two names equal. There should
// be no conflict with that, since names are not unique.
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "Bar.htm", 30, 30);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -2831,7 +2847,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath) {
TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath_OldBookmarksProto) {
mock_server_->set_use_legacy_bookmarks_protocol(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "Foo.htm", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
int64 local_folder_handle;
syncable::Id local_folder_id;
{
@@ -2848,7 +2864,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath_OldBookmarksProto) {
}
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "Bar.htm", 20, 20);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
{
// Update #20 should have been dropped in favor of the local version.
@@ -2867,13 +2883,13 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, NewEntryAndAlteredServerEntrySharePath_OldBookmarksProto) {
}
// Allow local changes to commit.
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(false);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
// Now add a server change to make the two names equal. There should
// be no conflict with that, since names are not unique.
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "Bar.htm", 30, 30);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -2898,7 +2914,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, SiblingDirectoriesBecomeCircular) {
// we don't currently resolve this. This test ensures we don't.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "B", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry A(&wtrans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1));
@@ -2909,7 +2925,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, SiblingDirectoriesBecomeCircular) {
}
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, "A", 20, 20);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -2927,7 +2943,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, SwapEntryNames) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "B", 10, 10);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry A(&wtrans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1));
@@ -2940,7 +2956,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, SwapEntryNames) {
ASSERT_TRUE(B.Put(NON_UNIQUE_NAME, "A"));
ASSERT_TRUE(A.Put(NON_UNIQUE_NAME, "B"));
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
}
@@ -2948,7 +2964,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DualDeletionWithNewItemNameClash) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "A", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(2, 0, "B", 10, 10);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry B(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(2));
@@ -2958,7 +2974,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DualDeletionWithNewItemNameClash) {
}
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(2, 0, "A", 11, 11);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateDeleted();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry B(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(2));
@@ -2973,7 +2989,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ResolveWeWroteTheyDeleted) {
int64 bob_metahandle;
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry bob(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1));
@@ -2984,8 +3000,8 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ResolveWeWroteTheyDeleted) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "bob", 2, 10);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateDeleted();
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry bob(&trans, GET_BY_HANDLE, bob_metahandle);
@@ -3019,16 +3035,16 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DuplicateIDReturn) {
mock_server_->set_next_new_id(10000);
EXPECT_EQ(1u, directory()->unsynced_entity_count());
// we get back a bad id in here (should never happen).
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1u, directory()->unsynced_entity_count());
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // another bad id in here.
+ SyncShareNudge(); // another bad id in here.
EXPECT_EQ(0u, directory()->unsynced_entity_count());
saw_syncer_event_ = false;
}
TEST_F(SyncerTest, DeletedEntryWithBadParentInLoopCalculation) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "bob", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry bob(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1));
@@ -3039,8 +3055,8 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DeletedEntryWithBadParentInLoopCalculation) {
bob.Put(IS_UNSYNCED, true);
}
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, "fred", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
+ SyncShareNudge();
}
TEST_F(SyncerTest, ConflictResolverMergesLocalDeleteAndServerUpdate) {
@@ -3060,7 +3076,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ConflictResolverMergesLocalDeleteAndServerUpdate) {
// We don't care about actually committing, just the resolution.
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3096,7 +3112,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UpdateFlipsTheFolderBit) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
// The syncer should not attempt to apply the invalid update.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3115,7 +3131,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UpdateFlipsTheFolderBit) {
TEST_F(SyncerTest, MergingExistingItems) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "base", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry entry(&trans, CREATE, trans.root_id(), "Copy of base");
@@ -3183,7 +3199,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DontMergeTwoExistingItems) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "base", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(2, 0, "base2", 10, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry entry(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(2));
@@ -3211,10 +3227,10 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteUpdate) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "foo", 1, 1);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, "bar", 1, 2);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, "bar", 2, 3);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateDeleted();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
int64 metahandle;
{
@@ -3226,11 +3242,11 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteUpdate) {
}
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "foo", 2, 4);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateDeleted();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// This used to be rejected as it's an undeletion. Now, it results in moving
// the delete path aside.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, "bar", 3, 5);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry entry(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(2));
@@ -3245,7 +3261,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteUpdate) {
TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestMoveSanitizedNamedFolder) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "foo", 1, 1);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, ":::", 1, 2);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
MutableEntry entry(&trans, GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(2));
@@ -3253,10 +3269,10 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestMoveSanitizedNamedFolder) {
EXPECT_TRUE(entry.Put(PARENT_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1)));
EXPECT_TRUE(entry.Put(IS_UNSYNCED, true));
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// We use the same sync ts as before so our times match up.
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, ":::", 2, 2);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
}
// Don't crash when this occurs.
@@ -3264,7 +3280,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UpdateWhereParentIsNotAFolder) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(1, 0, "B", 10, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 1, "BookmarkParent", 10, 10);
// Used to cause a CHECK
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction rtrans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry good_entry(&rtrans, syncable::GET_BY_ID, ids_.FromNumber(1));
@@ -3286,7 +3302,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DirectoryUpdateTest) {
"in_root_name", 2, 2);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(in_in_root_id, in_root_id,
"in_in_root_name", 3, 3);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry in_root(&trans, GET_BY_ID, in_root_id);
@@ -3324,7 +3340,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, DirectoryCommitTest) {
bar_metahandle = child.Get(META_HANDLE);
in_dir_id = parent.Get(syncable::ID);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
Entry fail_by_old_id_entry(&trans, GET_BY_ID, in_root_id);
@@ -3351,7 +3367,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestClientCommand) {
command->set_set_sync_long_poll_interval(800);
command->set_sessions_commit_delay_seconds(3141);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "in_root", 1, 1);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_TRUE(TimeDelta::FromSeconds(8) ==
last_short_poll_interval_received_);
@@ -3365,7 +3381,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestClientCommand) {
command->set_set_sync_long_poll_interval(190);
command->set_sessions_commit_delay_seconds(2718);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "in_root", 1, 1);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_TRUE(TimeDelta::FromSeconds(180) ==
last_short_poll_interval_received_);
@@ -3383,7 +3399,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EnsureWeSendUpOldParent) {
"folder_one", 1, 1);
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(folder_two_id, TestIdFactory::root(),
"folder_two", 1, 1);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
// A moved entry should send an "old parent."
WriteTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -3396,7 +3412,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, EnsureWeSendUpOldParent) {
create.Put(IS_UNSYNCED, true);
create.Put(SPECIFICS, DefaultBookmarkSpecifics());
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
const sync_pb::CommitMessage& commit = mock_server_->last_sent_commit();
ASSERT_EQ(2, commit.entries_size());
EXPECT_TRUE(commit.entries(0).parent_id_string() == "2");
@@ -3431,7 +3447,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestSimpleUndelete) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
// Let there be an entry from the server.
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id, root, "foo", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Check it out and delete it.
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -3443,7 +3459,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestSimpleUndelete) {
// Delete it locally.
entry.Put(IS_DEL, true);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Confirm we see IS_DEL and not SERVER_IS_DEL.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3454,11 +3470,11 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestSimpleUndelete) {
EXPECT_TRUE(entry.Get(IS_DEL));
EXPECT_FALSE(entry.Get(SERVER_IS_DEL));
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Update from server confirming deletion.
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id, root, "foo", 2, 11);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateDeleted();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// IS_DEL AND SERVER_IS_DEL now both true.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3471,7 +3487,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestSimpleUndelete) {
}
// Undelete from server.
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id, root, "foo", 2, 12);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// IS_DEL and SERVER_IS_DEL now both false.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3489,7 +3505,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteWithMissingDeleteUpdate) {
// Let there be a entry, from the server.
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id, root, "foo", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Check it out and delete it.
{
WriteTransaction wtrans(FROM_HERE, UNITTEST, directory());
@@ -3501,7 +3517,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteWithMissingDeleteUpdate) {
// Delete it locally.
entry.Put(IS_DEL, true);
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Confirm we see IS_DEL and not SERVER_IS_DEL.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3512,11 +3528,11 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteWithMissingDeleteUpdate) {
EXPECT_TRUE(entry.Get(IS_DEL));
EXPECT_FALSE(entry.Get(SERVER_IS_DEL));
}
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// Say we do not get an update from server confirming deletion. Undelete
// from server
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id, root, "foo", 2, 12);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// IS_DEL and SERVER_IS_DEL now both false.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3536,16 +3552,16 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, TestUndeleteIgnoreCorrectlyUnappliedUpdate) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id1, root, "foo", 1, 10);
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id2, root, "foo", 1, 10);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(id2, root, "foo2", 2, 20);
- SyncShareAsDelegate(); // Now just don't explode.
+ SyncShareNudge(); // Now just don't explode.
}
TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagServerCreatedUpdatesWork) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "permitem1", 1, 10);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("permfolder");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3560,7 +3576,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagServerCreatedUpdatesWork) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "permitem_renamed", 10, 100);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("permfolder");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3579,7 +3595,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagIllegalUpdateIgnored) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "permitem1", 1, 10);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("permfolder");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3594,7 +3610,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagIllegalUpdateIgnored) {
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(1, 0, "permitem_renamed", 10, 100);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("wrongtag");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3639,7 +3655,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagUncommittedTagMatchesUpdate) {
CopyFrom(server_bookmark);
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// This should cause client tag reunion, preserving the metahandle.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3661,7 +3677,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagUncommittedTagMatchesUpdate) {
}
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(false);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The resolved entry ought to commit cleanly.
{
@@ -3700,7 +3716,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagConflictWithDeletedLocalEntry) {
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("clientperm");
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// This should cause client tag overwrite.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3729,7 +3745,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagUpdateClashesWithLocalEntry) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
int64 tag1_metahandle = syncable::kInvalidMetaHandle;
int64 tag2_metahandle = syncable::kInvalidMetaHandle;
// This should cause client tag overwrite.
@@ -3769,7 +3785,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagUpdateClashesWithLocalEntry) {
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("tag1");
mock_server_->AddUpdateBookmark(3, 0, "Three", 13, 130);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag("tag2");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3841,7 +3857,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, ClientTagClashWithinBatchOfUpdates) {
mock_server_->set_conflict_all_commits(true);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// This should cause client tag overwrite.
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3909,7 +3925,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, UniqueServerTagUpdates) {
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateServerTag("alpha");
mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(2, 0, "update2", 2, 20);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateServerTag("bob");
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
{
ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
@@ -3940,31 +3956,146 @@ TEST_F(SyncerTest, GetUpdatesSetsRequestedTypes) {
// GetUpdates handler. EnableDatatype sets the expectation value from our
// set of enabled/disabled datatypes.
EnableDatatype(syncable::BOOKMARKS);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EnableDatatype(syncable::AUTOFILL);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EnableDatatype(syncable::PREFERENCES);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
DisableDatatype(syncable::BOOKMARKS);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
DisableDatatype(syncable::AUTOFILL);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
DisableDatatype(syncable::PREFERENCES);
EnableDatatype(syncable::AUTOFILL);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
}
+// A typical scenario: server and client each have one update for the other.
+// It is the "happy path" alternative to the test below.
+TEST_F(SyncerTest, UpdateThenCommit) {
+ syncable::Id to_receive = ids_.NewServerId();
+ syncable::Id to_commit = ids_.NewLocalId();
+
+ mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(to_receive, ids_.root(), "x", 1, 10);
+ int64 commit_handle = CreateUnsyncedDirectory("y", to_commit);
+ SyncShareNudge();
+
+ ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
+
+ Entry received(&trans, GET_BY_ID, to_receive);
+ ASSERT_TRUE(received.good());
+ EXPECT_FALSE(received.Get(IS_UNSYNCED));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(received.Get(IS_UNAPPLIED_UPDATE));
+
+ Entry committed(&trans, GET_BY_HANDLE, commit_handle);
+ ASSERT_TRUE(committed.good());
+ EXPECT_FALSE(committed.Get(IS_UNSYNCED));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(committed.Get(IS_UNAPPLIED_UPDATE));
+}
+
+// Same as above, but this time we fail to download updates.
+// We should not attempt to commit anything unless we successfully downloaded
+// updates, otherwise we risk causing a server-side conflict.
+TEST_F(SyncerTest, UpdateFailsThenDontCommit) {
+ syncable::Id to_receive = ids_.NewServerId();
+ syncable::Id to_commit = ids_.NewLocalId();
+
+ mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(to_receive, ids_.root(), "x", 1, 10);
+ int64 commit_handle = CreateUnsyncedDirectory("y", to_commit);
+ mock_server_->FailNextPostBufferToPathCall();
+ SyncShareNudge();
+
+ ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
+
+ // We did not receive this update.
+ Entry received(&trans, GET_BY_ID, to_receive);
+ ASSERT_FALSE(received.good());
+
+ // And our local update remains unapplied.
+ Entry committed(&trans, GET_BY_HANDLE, commit_handle);
+ ASSERT_TRUE(committed.good());
+ EXPECT_TRUE(committed.Get(IS_UNSYNCED));
+ EXPECT_FALSE(committed.Get(IS_UNAPPLIED_UPDATE));
+
+ // Inform the Mock we won't be fetching all updates.
+ mock_server_->ClearUpdatesQueue();
+}
+
+// Downloads two updates and applies them successfully.
+// This is the "happy path" alternative to the test below.
+TEST_F(SyncerTest, ConfigureDownloadsTwoBatchesSuccess) {
+ syncable::Id node1 = ids_.NewServerId();
+ syncable::Id node2 = ids_.NewServerId();
+
+ // Construct the first GetUpdates response.
+ mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(node1, ids_.root(), "one", 1, 10);
+ mock_server_->SetChangesRemaining(1);
+ mock_server_->NextUpdateBatch();
+
+ // Construct the second GetUpdates response.
+ mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(node2, ids_.root(), "two", 1, 20);
+
+ SyncShareConfigure();
+
+ ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
+ // Both nodes should be downloaded and applied.
+
+ Entry n1(&trans, GET_BY_ID, node1);
+ ASSERT_TRUE(n1.good());
+ EXPECT_FALSE(n1.Get(IS_UNAPPLIED_UPDATE));
+
+ Entry n2(&trans, GET_BY_ID, node2);
+ ASSERT_TRUE(n2.good());
+ EXPECT_FALSE(n2.Get(IS_UNAPPLIED_UPDATE));
+}
+
+// Same as the above case, but this time the second batch fails to download.
+TEST_F(SyncerTest, ConfigureFailsDontApplyUpdates) {
+ syncable::Id node1 = ids_.NewServerId();
+ syncable::Id node2 = ids_.NewServerId();
+
+ // The scenario: we have two batches of updates with one update each. A
+ // normal confgure step would download all the updates one batch at a time and
+ // apply them. This configure will succeed in downloading the first batch
+ // then fail when downloading the second.
+ mock_server_->FailNthPostBufferToPathCall(2);
+
+ // Construct the first GetUpdates response.
+ mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(node1, ids_.root(), "one", 1, 10);
+ mock_server_->SetChangesRemaining(1);
+ mock_server_->NextUpdateBatch();
+
+ // Consutrct the second GetUpdates response.
+ mock_server_->AddUpdateDirectory(node2, ids_.root(), "two", 1, 20);
+
+ SyncShareConfigure();
+
+ ReadTransaction trans(FROM_HERE, directory());
+
+ // The first node was downloaded, but not applied.
+ Entry n1(&trans, GET_BY_ID, node1);
+ ASSERT_TRUE(n1.good());
+ EXPECT_TRUE(n1.Get(IS_UNAPPLIED_UPDATE));
+
+ // The second node was not downloaded.
+ Entry n2(&trans, GET_BY_ID, node2);
+ EXPECT_FALSE(n2.good());
+
+ // One update remains undownloaded.
+ mock_server_->ClearUpdatesQueue();
+}
+
// Test what happens if a client deletes, then recreates, an object very
// quickly. It is possible that the deletion gets sent as a commit, and
// the undelete happens during the commit request. The principle here
@@ -4102,7 +4233,7 @@ class SyncerUndeletionTest : public SyncerTest {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteDuringCommit) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4113,7 +4244,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteDuringCommit) {
ExpectUnsyncedDeletion();
mock_server_->SetMidCommitCallback(
base::Bind(&SyncerUndeletionTest::Undelete, base::Unretained(this)));
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The item ought to exist as an unsynced undeletion (meaning,
// we think that the next commit ought to be a recreation commit).
@@ -4127,7 +4258,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteDuringCommit) {
// normal to recieve updates from our own commits.
mock_server_->SetMidCommitCallback(base::Closure());
mock_server_->AddUpdateTombstone(Get(metahandle_, ID));
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4136,7 +4267,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteDuringCommit) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteBeforeCommit) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4147,7 +4278,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteBeforeCommit) {
ExpectUnsyncedDeletion();
Undelete();
ExpectUnsyncedEdit(); // Edit, not undelete: server thinks it exists.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The item ought to have committed successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4158,7 +4289,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteBeforeCommit) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// update.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4167,7 +4298,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteBeforeCommit) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterCommitButBeforeGetUpdates) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4176,7 +4307,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterCommitButBeforeGetUpdates) {
// Delete and commit.
Delete();
ExpectUnsyncedDeletion();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The item ought to have committed successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4190,7 +4321,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterCommitButBeforeGetUpdates) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// deletion update. The undeletion should prevail.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4199,14 +4330,14 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterCommitButBeforeGetUpdates) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterDeleteAndGetUpdates) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4214,7 +4345,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterDeleteAndGetUpdates) {
// Delete and commit.
Delete();
ExpectUnsyncedDeletion();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The item ought to have committed successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4224,7 +4355,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterDeleteAndGetUpdates) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// deletion update. Should be consistent.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndDeleted();
@@ -4235,7 +4366,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterDeleteAndGetUpdates) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// deletion update. The undeletion should prevail.
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4245,7 +4376,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterDeleteAndGetUpdates) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletes) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4253,14 +4384,14 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletes) {
// Add a delete from the server.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
// Some other client deletes the item.
mock_server_->AddUpdateTombstone(Get(metahandle_, ID));
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The update ought to have applied successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4270,7 +4401,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletes) {
// Undelete it locally.
Undelete();
ExpectUnsyncedUndeletion();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4278,7 +4409,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletes) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// deletion update. The undeletion should prevail.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4287,7 +4418,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletes) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletesImmediately) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4296,7 +4427,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletesImmediately) {
// Some other client deletes the item before we get a chance
// to GetUpdates our original request.
mock_server_->AddUpdateTombstone(Get(metahandle_, ID));
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The update ought to have applied successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4306,7 +4437,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletesImmediately) {
// Undelete it locally.
Undelete();
ExpectUnsyncedUndeletion();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4314,7 +4445,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletesImmediately) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// deletion update. The undeletion should prevail.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4323,7 +4454,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, UndeleteAfterOtherClientDeletesImmediately) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletes) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4331,7 +4462,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletes) {
// Get the updates of our just-committed entry.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4339,7 +4470,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletes) {
// We delete the item.
Delete();
ExpectUnsyncedDeletion();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The update ought to have applied successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4349,7 +4480,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletes) {
// Now, encounter a GetUpdates corresponding to the just-committed
// deletion update.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndDeleted();
@@ -4359,7 +4490,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletes) {
Get(metahandle_, PARENT_ID),
"Thadeusz", 100, 1000);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag(client_tag_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4369,7 +4500,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletes) {
TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletesImmediately) {
Create();
ExpectUnsyncedCreation();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4377,7 +4508,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletesImmediately) {
// Get the updates of our just-committed entry.
mock_server_->AddUpdateFromLastCommit();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4385,7 +4516,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletesImmediately) {
// We delete the item.
Delete();
ExpectUnsyncedDeletion();
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
// The update ought to have applied successfully.
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
@@ -4398,7 +4529,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerUndeletionTest, OtherClientUndeletesImmediately) {
Get(metahandle_, PARENT_ID),
"Thadeusz", 100, 1000);
mock_server_->SetLastUpdateClientTag(client_tag_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
EXPECT_EQ(0, session_->status_controller().TotalNumConflictingItems());
EXPECT_EQ(1, mock_server_->GetAndClearNumGetUpdatesRequests());
ExpectSyncedAndCreated();
@@ -4463,7 +4594,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionUpdateTest, InOrderPositive) {
AddRootItemWithPosition(201);
AddRootItemWithPosition(400);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalItemsInServerOrder();
}
@@ -4475,7 +4606,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionUpdateTest, InOrderNegative) {
AddRootItemWithPosition(-150);
AddRootItemWithPosition(100);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalItemsInServerOrder();
}
@@ -4490,7 +4621,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionUpdateTest, ReverseOrder) {
AddRootItemWithPosition(-200);
AddRootItemWithPosition(-400);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalItemsInServerOrder();
}
@@ -4502,7 +4633,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionUpdateTest, RandomOrderInBatches) {
AddRootItemWithPosition(-400);
AddRootItemWithPosition(100);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalItemsInServerOrder();
AddRootItemWithPosition(-150);
@@ -4510,12 +4641,12 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionUpdateTest, RandomOrderInBatches) {
AddRootItemWithPosition(200);
AddRootItemWithPosition(-201);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalItemsInServerOrder();
AddRootItemWithPosition(-144);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalItemsInServerOrder();
}
@@ -4575,7 +4706,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionTiebreakingTest, LowMidHigh) {
Add(low_id_);
Add(mid_id_);
Add(high_id_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalOrderIsByServerId();
}
@@ -4583,7 +4714,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionTiebreakingTest, LowHighMid) {
Add(low_id_);
Add(high_id_);
Add(mid_id_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalOrderIsByServerId();
}
@@ -4591,7 +4722,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionTiebreakingTest, HighMidLow) {
Add(high_id_);
Add(mid_id_);
Add(low_id_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalOrderIsByServerId();
}
@@ -4599,7 +4730,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionTiebreakingTest, HighLowMid) {
Add(high_id_);
Add(low_id_);
Add(mid_id_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalOrderIsByServerId();
}
@@ -4607,7 +4738,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionTiebreakingTest, MidHighLow) {
Add(mid_id_);
Add(high_id_);
Add(low_id_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalOrderIsByServerId();
}
@@ -4615,7 +4746,7 @@ TEST_F(SyncerPositionTiebreakingTest, MidLowHigh) {
Add(mid_id_);
Add(low_id_);
Add(high_id_);
- SyncShareAsDelegate();
+ SyncShareNudge();
ExpectLocalOrderIsByServerId();
}
« no previous file with comments | « sync/engine/syncer.cc ('k') | sync/sessions/status_controller.h » ('j') | no next file with comments »

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698