test: test_inv_block, use mocktime instead of waiting #31811

1. 
   instagibbs commented at 4:37 pm on February 6, 2025: member

   Performance issue reported in #31437 (comment)

   It seems that code as-is waits for wall-clock time to pass to synchronize mempools. Locally, sometimes the subtest takes a couple seconds, sometimes it takes an additional minute.

   Just use mocktime?

2. test: test_inv_block, use mocktime instead of waiting 2706c5b7c8
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 4:37 pm on February 6, 2025: contributor

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Code Coverage & Benchmarks

   For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/31811.

   Reviews

   See the guideline for information on the review process.

   Type	Reviewers
   ACK	sr-gi, Prabhat1308, rishkwal

   If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

4. DrahtBot added the label Tests on Feb 6, 2025
5. 
   sr-gi commented at 6:54 pm on February 6, 2025: member

   tACK 2706c5b

   Run the test several times and it seems to be consistent around ~30s now, whereas it previously fluctuated between ~30-90s

6. 
   Prabhat1308 commented at 8:07 pm on February 6, 2025: none

   tACK 2706c5b

   Speedup is observed when running the test with the diffs.

   ACK with the use of Mocktime as the test is independent from the use of wall-clock time. This can be seen by the use of setmocktime() in other functions in the same file as well .

7. 
   rishkwal commented at 11:11 am on February 7, 2025: none

   tACK 2706c5b

   Tested multiple times. Previously took anywhere between 36 to 96 seconds. Now consistently taking around 35 to 37 seconds. Agree that test_inv_block does not need real-time delay.

8. glozow merged this on Feb 7, 2025
9. glozow closed this on Feb 7, 2025

   ---

Contributors
instagibbs DrahtBot sr-gi Prabhat1308 rishkwal

Labels
Tests