netServerEnum2.writeParametersWireFormat(dst, 0);
        });
    }

    @Test
    @DisplayName("Test writeParametersWireFormat with large buffer succeeds")
    void testWriteParametersWireFormatLargeBuffer() {
        String domain = "DOMAIN";
        netServerEnum2 = new NetServerEnum2(realConfig, domain, NetServerEnum2.SV_TYPE_ALL);

 *
 * <h3>Warning about performance</h3>
 *
 * <p>Remember that parameter values for message construction must all be computed eagerly, and
 * autoboxing and varargs array creation may happen as well, even when the verification succeeds and
 * the message ends up unneeded. Performance-sensitive verification checks should continue to use
 * usual form:
 *
 * {@snippet :
 * Bill bill = remoteService.getLastUnpaidBill();

            }
        };

        UserInfoService userInfoService = new UserInfoService() {
            @Override
            public void deleteBefore(int days) {
                // This one succeeds
            }
        };

        SystemHelper systemHelper = new SystemHelper() {
            @Override
            public long getCurrentTimeAsLong() {
                return 1234567890L;
            }

   * creation and removal (including automatic removal of zeroes). If the modification of an
   * AtomicInteger results in zero, we compareAndSet the value to zero; if that succeeds, we remove
   * the entry from the Map. If another operation sees a zero in the map, it knows that the entry is
   * about to be removed, so this operation may remove it (often by replacing it with a new
   * AtomicInteger).

  public static <V extends @Nullable Object> V getDone(Future<V> future) throws ExecutionException {
    /*
     * We throw IllegalStateException, since the call could succeed later. Perhaps we "should" throw
     * IllegalArgumentException, since the call could succeed with a different argument. Those
     * exceptions' docs suggest that either is acceptable. Google's Java Practices page recommends

 *
 * <h3>Warning about performance</h3>
 *
 * <p>Remember that parameter values for message construction must all be computed eagerly, and
 * autoboxing and varargs array creation may happen as well, even when the verification succeeds and
 * the message ends up unneeded. Performance-sensitive verification checks should continue to use
 * usual form:
 *
 * {@snippet :
 * Bill bill = remoteService.getLastUnpaidBill();

            // or completion values.
            newFuture.setFuture(oldFuture);
          } else if (outputFuture.isCancelled() && taskExecutor.trySetCancelled()) {
            // If this CAS succeeds, we know that the provided callable will never be invoked,
            // so when oldFuture completes it is safe to allow the next submitted task to

   * creation and removal (including automatic removal of zeroes). If the modification of an
   * AtomicInteger results in zero, we compareAndSet the value to zero; if that succeeds, we remove
   * the entry from the Map. If another operation sees a zero in the map, it knows that the entry is
   * about to be removed, so this operation may remove it (often by replacing it with a new
   * AtomicInteger).

     *
     * @return failure count
     */
    public int getFailureCount() {
        return failureCount.get();
    }

    /**
     * Get current success count (in HALF_OPEN state)
     *
     * @return success count
     */
    public int getSuccessCount() {
        return successCount.get();
    }

    /**
     * Get time since last state change
     *

    assertFailsWith<InterruptedIOException> {
      // If this succeeds, too many requests were made.
      client.newCall(request).execute()
    }
  }

  /**
   * Make a request with two routes. The first route will time out because it's connecting to a
   * special address that never connects. The automatic retry will succeed.
   */
  @Test
  fun connectTimeoutsAttemptsAlternateRoute() {