BAEL-5969 - Parallel Flux vs Flux in Project Reactor #18552
Conversation
LordMaduz
commented
May 17, 2025
LordMaduz
commented
- Implementation
1) Implementation
reactor-core-2/src/main/java/com/baeldung/reactor/fluxvsparallelflux/Fibonacci.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
reactor-core-2/src/test/java/com/baeldung/reactor/flux/parallelflux/FluxUnitTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
reactor-core-2/src/test/java/com/baeldung/reactor/flux/parallelflux/ParallelFluxUnitTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
reactor-core-2/src/test/java/com/baeldung/reactor/flux/parallelflux/ParallelFluxUnitTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
reactor-core-2/src/test/java/com/baeldung/reactor/flux/parallelflux/ParallelFluxUnitTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
reactor-core-2/src/test/java/com/baeldung/reactor/flux/parallelflux/ParallelFluxUnitTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicLong; | ||
|
|
||
| @Slf4j | ||
| public class ParallelFluxUnitTest { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is different about the two tests here, what are you trying to demonstrate, the same thing in each test or is there a different concept being communicated? I didn't understand the distinction
There was a problem hiding this comment.
First Test is to show Case General case of ParallelFlux where for computationally expensive tasks time taken is less than Flux Version. Also each element is processed once and emitted once.
Second Test is to show that the point that order of processing is not always same like that of Flux. We can't; guarantee the order of processing by default in ParallelFlux.
1) Implementation
1) Implementation
1) Disable Fibonacci Tests marked them as manual.
This reverts commit 1510fa9.
1) Disable Fibonacci Tests marked them as manual.
| @Disabled("Manual test - takes time due to heavy computation") | ||
| @Test | ||
| public void givenFibonacciIndices_whenComputingWithFlux_thenCorrectResults() { | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove newlines at the start of methods like this
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @RepeatedTest(5) | ||
| public void givenListOfIds_whenComputingWithParallelFlux_OrderChanges() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have a naming convention given_when_then
| public void givenListOfIds_whenComputingWithParallelFlux_OrderChanges() { | |
| public void givenListOfIds_whenComputingWithParallelFlux_thenOrderChanges() { |
| import java.util.concurrent.CopyOnWriteArrayList; | ||
|
|
||
| @Slf4j | ||
| public class ParallelFluxUnitTest { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| public class ParallelFluxUnitTest { | |
| public class ParallelFluxManualTest { |
| @Slf4j | ||
| public class ParallelFluxUnitTest { | ||
|
|
||
| @Disabled("Manual test - takes time due to heavy computation") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @Disabled("Manual test - takes time due to heavy computation") |
| @Slf4j | ||
| public class FluxUnitTest { | ||
|
|
||
| @Disabled("Manual test - takes time due to heavy computation") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| @Disabled("Manual test - takes time due to heavy computation") |
Don't do this - we have a naming convention instead - FluxManualTest - that will avoid it being run in CI
| import java.time.Duration; | ||
|
|
||
| @Slf4j | ||
| public class FluxUnitTest { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| public class FluxUnitTest { | |
| public class FluxManualTest { |
| .expectNextCount(3) | ||
| .verifyComplete(); | ||
|
|
||
| System.out.println("ParallelFlux emitted order: " + emitted); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We have a convention to use loggers not System.out
