[PATCH 1/2] HACK: test: test folder renames

Subject: [PATCH 1/2] HACK: test: test folder renames

Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 12:35:30 +0300

To: Mark Walters, notmuch@notmuchmail.org

Cc:

From: Jani Nikula

On Sun, 23 Feb 2014, Mark Walters <markwalters1009@gmail.com> wrote [1]:
> I was experimenting with letting notmuch new take an argument to tell it
> to scan only a particular directory (and sub-directories) for new
> messages. I came across the following strange behaviour which is also
> present in master (with a fresh database)
>
> I have a bunch of maildirs in /home/mail: so folders .mail.foo/
> .mail.bar/ each of which has cur/new/tmp and all the messages are in
> cur.
>
> If I do mv .mail.foo .mail.bar/ and run notmuch new I get the expected
> lots of renames (900 or so in the case I was trying). But if I then do
> mv .mail.bar/.mail.foo . and run notmuch new almost all the messages get
> removed (but 30 renames do get detected). If I then do touch .mail.foo/*
> the messages get found again
>
> I am guessing the 30 renames might be because those 30 have duplicates
> somewhere else.
>
> But the other behaviour has me puzzled.

This test reproduces the problem for me, but it's not deterministic,
and I've been unable to make it so. Thus there's a loop of 100
attempts, and usually I hit the problem several times like this:

 FAIL   Rename folder back
 --- T051-new-renames.27.expected	2014-02-23 21:37:10.121774241 +0000
 +++ T051-new-renames.27.output		2014-02-23 21:37:10.121774241 +0000
 @@ -1 +1 @@
 -No new mail. Detected 10 file renames.
 +No new mail. Removed 10 messages.
 FAIL   Files remain the same
 --- T051-new-renames.28.expected	2014-02-23 21:37:10.133774652 +0000
 +++ T051-new-renames.28.output		2014-02-23 21:37:10.133774652 +0000
 @@ -1,13 +1,3 @@
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-121
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-122
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-123
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-124
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-125
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-126
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-127
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-128
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-129
 -/path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/foo/msg-130
  /path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/bar/msg-131
  /path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/bar/msg-132
  /path/to/test/tmp.T051-new-renames/mail/bar/msg-133

This test is not suitable for merging since it's not
deterministic. But maybe it's good enough to assess the patch that
follows.

[1] id:87siray6th.fsf@qmul.ac.uk
---
 test/T051-new-renames.sh | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+)
 create mode 100755 test/T051-new-renames.sh

diff --git a/test/T051-new-renames.sh b/test/T051-new-renames.sh
new file mode 100755
index 000000000000..3c1515da1085
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/T051-new-renames.sh
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+test_description='"notmuch new" with directory renames'
+. ./test-lib.sh
+
+for loop in `seq 100`; do
+
+rm -rf ${MAIL_DIR}
+
+for i in `seq 10`; do
+    generate_message '[dir]=foo' '[subject]="Message foo $i"'
+done
+
+for i in `seq 10`; do
+    generate_message '[dir]=bar' '[subject]="Message bar $i"'
+done
+
+test_begin_subtest "Index the messages, round $loop"
+output=$(NOTMUCH_NEW)
+test_expect_equal "$output" "Added 20 new messages to the database."
+
+all_files=$(notmuch search --output=files \*)
+count_foo=$(notmuch count folder:foo)
+
+test_begin_subtest "Rename folder foo -> baz"
+mv ${MAIL_DIR}/foo ${MAIL_DIR}/baz
+output=$(NOTMUCH_NEW)
+test_expect_equal "$output" "No new mail. Detected $count_foo file renames."
+
+test_begin_subtest "Rename folder back baz -> foo"
+mv ${MAIL_DIR}/baz ${MAIL_DIR}/foo
+output=$(NOTMUCH_NEW)
+test_expect_equal "$output" "No new mail. Detected $count_foo file renames."
+
+test_begin_subtest "Files remain the same"
+output=$(notmuch search --output=files \*)
+test_expect_equal "$output" "$all_files"
+
+done
+
+test_done
-- 
2.1.4

Thread: