Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

gh-108963: using random to generate unique string in sys.intern test #109491

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Oct 2, 2023

Conversation

aisk
Copy link
Contributor

@aisk aisk commented Sep 16, 2023

@bedevere-app bedevere-app bot added awaiting review tests Tests in the Lib/test dir labels Sep 16, 2023
@aisk aisk changed the title using random to generate unique string in sys.intern test gh-108963: using random to generate unique string in sys.intern test Sep 16, 2023
@vstinner
Copy link
Member

This change hides the issue that the test actually leaks memory: intern a string which is then only released at Python exit. Can we add a private deintern() function in _testcapi? Or run the test in a subprocess?

Well, i don't know that it's a big deal, this change is ooookay-ish.

self.assertRaises(TypeError, sys.intern)
s = "never interned before" + str(INTERN_NUMRUNS)
s = "never interned before" + str(random.random())
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would prefer using random.randint(), for example 10**9 to have 9 random digits. I prefer to avoid float when possible 😁 Same below.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done

Copy link
Member

@serhiy-storchaka serhiy-storchaka Sep 19, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But this increases the probability of random failure from 1/253 (about 1/1016) to 1/(9*10**8). If run the test every second, there will be a failure every 30 years in average.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@aisk aisk Sep 19, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On my machine, the random.random() returns something like 0.35934878814573135, which have 18 digits (with the first zero). So can we just increase the max range to 10 ** 18 to keep the random resolution almost like as the random.random()?

@@ -693,7 +693,7 @@ def test_43581(self):

def test_intern(self):
self.assertRaises(TypeError, sys.intern)
s = "never interned before" + str(random.int(10**8, 10**9))
s = "never interned before" + str(random.randint(10**8, 10**9))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the intention is to generate random 9-digit numbers, use randrange() instead of randint().

@@ -693,7 +693,7 @@ def test_43581(self):

def test_intern(self):
self.assertRaises(TypeError, sys.intern)
s = "never interned before" + str(random.random())
s = "never interned before" + str(random.int(10**8, 10**9))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

random.int doesn't exist. What's the point of putting a minimum at 10**8? Why not 0?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is a more recent commit in the PR fixed the bug. The minimal start is for ensure the random parts have 9 digits, I think it's more consistent.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i don't think that the string length (number of random int digits) matters here, does it?

self.assertRaises(TypeError, sys.intern)
s = "never interned before" + str(INTERN_NUMRUNS)
s = "never interned before" + str(random.randrange(0, 10**18))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, for me 9 digits was already way enough. 18 digits is just too much 😁 You can just pass the max value:

Suggested change
s = "never interned before" + str(random.randrange(0, 10**18))
s = "never interned before" + str(random.randrange(10**9))

Copy link
Member

@vstinner vstinner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

It makes me sad to leak memory. But I'm not sure about a private API to de-intern a string. I'm not sure of the consequences.

@vstinner vstinner added skip news needs backport to 3.12 bug and security fixes labels Oct 2, 2023
@vstinner vstinner merged commit 44b1e4e into python:main Oct 2, 2023
@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @aisk for the PR, and @vstinner for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry, @aisk and @vstinner, I could not cleanly backport this to 3.12 due to a conflict.
Please backport using cherry_picker on command line.

cherry_picker 44b1e4ea4842c6cdc1bedba7aaeb93f236b3ec08 3.12

@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Oct 2, 2023

GH-110216 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch.

@bedevere-app bedevere-app bot removed the needs backport to 3.12 bug and security fixes label Oct 2, 2023
Yhg1s pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2023
…n test … (#110216)

gh-108963: using random to generate unique string in sys.intern test (#109491)

(cherry picked from commit 44b1e4e)

Co-authored-by: AN Long <aisk@users.noreply.github.com>
@aisk aisk deleted the fix-gh108963 branch October 3, 2023 07:16
Glyphack pushed a commit to Glyphack/cpython that referenced this pull request Sep 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
skip news tests Tests in the Lib/test dir
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants