What the developer wrote
Authored by Nicolas Dorier
Fix flaky test
What changed, and why it matters
This commit only changes a test file to make an automated test less flaky. It adds checks so the test waits for the correct payout event and allows empty hooks in one specific scenario. There is no change to production code and no security issue.
No security action needed; this is a test-only reliability fix.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The diff modifies BTCPayServer.Tests/GreenfieldAPITests.cs, a unit/integration test. It refines TaskCompletionSource signaling in a test of automated payout processing hooks by filtering hook events against an expected pull payment ID and allowing empty hook results during a threshold-limiter test. No application code is changed.
Changed components
BTCPayServer.Tests/GreenfieldAPITests.csInspect captured patch +11 / −13
diff --git a/BTCPayServer.Tests/GreenfieldAPITests.cs b/BTCPayServer.Tests/GreenfieldAPITests.cs
index 8a8c69e..8b509a3 100644
--- a/BTCPayServer.Tests/GreenfieldAPITests.cs
+++ b/BTCPayServer.Tests/GreenfieldAPITests.cs
@@ -3583,27 +3583,24 @@ namespace BTCPayServer.Tests
var pluginHookService = tester.PayTester.GetService<IPluginHookService>();
var beforeHookTcs = new TaskCompletionSource(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
var afterHookTcs = new TaskCompletionSource(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
+ string hookExpectedPullPayment = pullPayment.Id;
+ bool allowEmptyHook = false;
TestLogs.LogInformation("Adding hook...");
pluginHookService.ActionInvoked += (sender, tuple) =>
{
switch (tuple.hook)
{
case "before-automated-payout-processing":
- beforeHookTcs.TrySetResult();
var bd = (BeforePayoutActionData)tuple.args;
- foreach (var p in bd.Payouts)
- {
- TestLogs.LogInformation("Before Processed: " + p.Id);
- }
+ TestLogs.LogInformation("Before!");
+ if (allowEmptyHook || bd.Payouts.Any(p => p.PullPaymentDataId == hookExpectedPullPayment))
+ beforeHookTcs.TrySetResult();
break;
case "after-automated-payout-processing":
- TestLogs.LogInformation("afterHookTcs.TrySetResult();");
- afterHookTcs.TrySetResult();
+ TestLogs.LogInformation("After!");
var ad = (AfterPayoutActionData)tuple.args;
- foreach (var p in ad.Payouts)
- {
- TestLogs.LogInformation("After Processed: " + p.Id);
- }
+ if (allowEmptyHook || ad.Payouts.Any(p => p.PullPaymentDataId == hookExpectedPullPayment))
+ afterHookTcs.TrySetResult();
break;
}
};
@@ -3615,9 +3612,7 @@ namespace BTCPayServer.Tests
PayoutMethodId = "BTC",
Destination = (await adminClient.GetOnChainWalletReceiveAddress(admin.StoreId, "BTC", true)).Address,
});
- TestLogs.LogInformation("Waiting before hook...");
await beforeHookTcs.Task.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
- TestLogs.LogInformation("Waiting before after...");
await afterHookTcs.Task.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
payouts = await adminClient.GetStorePayouts(admin.StoreId);
try
@@ -3636,8 +3631,10 @@ namespace BTCPayServer.Tests
throw;
}
+ hookExpectedPullPayment = null;
beforeHookTcs = new TaskCompletionSource();
afterHookTcs = new TaskCompletionSource();
+ allowEmptyHook = true;
//let's test the threshold limiter
settings.Threshold = 0.5m;
await adminClient.UpdateStoreOnChainAutomatedPayoutProcessors(admin.StoreId, "BTC", settings);
@@ -3645,6 +3642,7 @@ namespace BTCPayServer.Tests
//quick test: when updating processor, it processes instantly
await beforeHookTcs.Task.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
await afterHookTcs.Task.WaitAsync(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(5));
+ allowEmptyHook = false;
settings =
Assert.Single(await adminClient.GetStoreOnChainAutomatedPayoutProcessors(admin.StoreId, "BTC"));
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.