Repository navigation
Add HTTP API concurrency regression test - #186
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 5f7ed22469
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| Assertions.assertFalse( | ||
| secondRequestEnteredHook.await(200, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS), | ||
| "GET entered generated API processing before POST completed"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the executor's second worker is not scheduled during this 200 ms window, the latch remains closed even after synchronization is removed; the test then releases the POST, the delayed GET runs, and every later assertion can pass. Ensure the GET worker has actually attempted the API call—for example, by capturing it in the expected blocked state—before treating failure to enter the hook as evidence of serialization.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L3-L4
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| Assertions.assertTrue( | ||
| hooksRanInsideThingifierLock.get(), | ||
| "Generated API hook ran outside the Thingifier model lock"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This assertion adds a distinct implementation-level rule to a test that already verifies request ordering and POST-to-GET data visibility. Serialization could remain correct after moving the lock lower, as the TODO proposes, or after replacing the intrinsic monitor, yet this assertion would fail; conversely, a failure does not identify which behavior regressed. Keep the domain-level serialization scenario focused and test exact monitor ownership separately only if it is an intentional contract.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L6-L8
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
Verification