Marc-André Bombeck 4f3a790ce7 test(workouts): pin the losing side of a concurrent enrichment ...

Two requests can probe the same workout, both find no heart-rate series,
and both mean to attach one. The unique index on `workout_id` picks a
winner; the loser has to report the duplicate it turned out to be rather
than claim an attach the database never made. Nothing could catch that
arm going wrong: the unit fake echoes every row back as landed, and the
race suite carries no series at all, so replacing the status with a
constant `enriched` left the whole suite green. Two concurrent posts of
the same enrichment now assert one `enriched` against one `duplicate`
and a single stored series.

The published contract also says now what the counters mean, instead of
leaving it in a comment: an entry reported as `enriched` counts towards
`duplicates`, because the top-level counters count workout rows and an
enrichment writes none. Field descriptions on the response and on the
per-entry status and reason, OpenAPI regenerated.

2026-08-08 09:53:09 +02:00

1.3 MiB

Raw Blame History