Ignore errors from more callsites of FixupURLAndGetVisits().

Ignore errors from more callsites of FixupURLAndGetVisits().

Now we ignore errors returned from FixupURLAndGetVisits() in all calls during ModelAssociation.

There is still a call in TypedURLChangeProcessor, but I haven't seen any errors reported from that one yet so I'm being conservative and letting that one continue to throw an unrecoverable error.

BUG=123219
TEST=Added new unit test.


Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=133789

[Andrew T Wilson (Slow), 2012-04-24 01:24:41]

PTAL.

[tim (not reviewing), 2012-04-24 18:30:00]

LGTM with comments

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed...
File chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed_url_model_associator.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed...
chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed_url_model_associator.cc:380: // Just treat this
URL as if it were not an existing URL.
Are there any UMA stats anywhere in history tracking flaky access like this? If
so it'd be interesting to keep one here and track if they line up / diverge. 
Just a thought, no real request here.

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/profile_sy...
File chrome/browser/sync/profile_sync_service_typed_url_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/profile_sy...
chrome/browser/sync/profile_sync_service_typed_url_unittest.cc:505:
WillRepeatedly(Return(false));
Can you just add a comment above this EXPECT_CALL mentioning this is the
mock-out to return failure / the "Error" alluded to in the test name.

[Andrew T Wilson (Slow), 2012-04-24 21:04:04]

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed...
File chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed_url_model_associator.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed...
chrome/browser/sync/glue/typed_url_model_associator.cc:380: // Just treat this
URL as if it were not an existing URL.
On 2012/04/24 18:30:00, timsteele wrote:
> Are there any UMA stats anywhere in history tracking flaky access like this?
If
> so it'd be interesting to keep one here and track if they line up / diverge. 
> Just a thought, no real request here.
There are no stats currently. We might want to add some down in the history code
at some point, though.

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/profile_sy...
File chrome/browser/sync/profile_sync_service_typed_url_unittest.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/10140012/diff/1/chrome/browser/sync/profile_sy...
chrome/browser/sync/profile_sync_service_typed_url_unittest.cc:505:
WillRepeatedly(Return(false));
On 2012/04/24 18:30:00, timsteele wrote:
> Can you just add a comment above this EXPECT_CALL mentioning this is the
> mock-out to return failure / the "Error" alluded to in the test name.

Done.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-04-24 21:04:21]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/atwilson@chromium.org/10140012/9001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-04-24 22:42:23]

Change committed as 133789