ServiceWorker: Add missing tests for ServiceWorkerDatabase

ServiceWorker: Add missing tests for ServiceWorkerDatabase

Tests for UpdateVersionToActive() and UpdateLastCheckTime() are missing.


BUG=n/a
TEST=content_unittest --gtest_filter=ServiceWorkerDatabaseTest.*

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=271231

[nhiroki, 2014-05-16 08:41:55]

Hi Michael, can you review this? Thanks!

https://codereview.chromium.org/290133003/diff/40001/content/browser/service_...
File content/browser/service_worker/service_worker_database_unittest.cc (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/290133003/diff/40001/content/browser/service_...
content/browser/service_worker/service_worker_database_unittest.cc:565:
TEST(ServiceWorkerDatabaseTest, UpdateLastCheckTime) {
Btw, though base::Time could be decreased when a user changes the computer
clock, current UpdateLastCheckTime() does not compare the stored last-check-time
and the given last-check-time, and the given time always wins. Is this right
behavior? I guess this is OK because if a user changes the clock to the far
future and resets it after some registrations are stored, they couldn't be
checked forever. Wdyt?

[michaeln, 2014-05-16 22:16:24]

lgtm, the db class just writes/reads the values, i think the caller is going to
have to check for oddities like the lasttime being in the future.

>
https://codereview.chromium.org/290133003/diff/40001/content/browser/service_...
> content/browser/service_worker/service_worker_database_unittest.cc:565:
> TEST(ServiceWorkerDatabaseTest, UpdateLastCheckTime) {
> Btw, though base::Time could be decreased when a user changes the computer
> clock, current UpdateLastCheckTime() does not compare the stored
last-check-time
> and the given last-check-time, and the given time always wins. Is this right
> behavior? I guess this is OK because if a user changes the clock to the far
> future and resets it after some registrations are stored, they couldn't be
> checked forever. Wdyt?

[nhiroki, 2014-05-17 02:21:13]

On 2014/05/16 22:16:24, michaeln wrote:
> lgtm, the db class just writes/reads the values, i think the caller is going
to
> have to check for oddities like the lasttime being in the future.

I got it. Thank you.

[nhiroki, 2014-05-17 02:21:19]

The CQ bit was checked by nhiroki@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-17 02:22:28]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nhiroki@chromium.org/290133003/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-17 08:25:18]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
Please consider checking whether the failures are real,
and report flakes to chrome-troopers@google.com.
The failing builders are:
  android_dbg_triggered_tests on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg_triggered...)
  win_chromium_rel on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/win_chromium_rel/buil...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-17 09:41:47]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-17 09:41:48]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  android_dbg_triggered_tests on tryserver.chromium
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium/builders/android_dbg_triggered...)

[nhiroki, 2014-05-17 15:30:18]

The CQ bit was checked by nhiroki@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-17 15:31:17]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/nhiroki@chromium.org/290133003/60001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-05-17 17:01:42]

Change committed as 271231