Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[data.search] Expose wait_for_completion_timeout for clients and tests to use #107241

Closed
FrankHassanabad opened this issue Jul 29, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
Feature:Search Querying infrastructure in Kibana impact:low Addressing this issue will have a low level of impact on the quality/strength of our product. loe:small Small Level of Effort NeededFor:Security Project:AsyncSearch Background search, partial results, async search services.

Comments

@FrankHassanabad
Copy link
Contributor

FrankHassanabad commented Jul 29, 2021

Describe the feature:
The search strategies do not expose the wait_for_completion_timeout that can be set in REST by clients and instead gives everyone a global default of 100ms it looks like here:

We would like for this to be REST configurable as an option for the strategies mostly for end to end tests to where we can set this value higher as this causes us to either write utility functions or to handle when things come back async vs. sync, versus us just sending down this setting to allow us to wait longer and avoid flake.

Recent flakes on CI seen when queries look to be going from sync to async:
#94535

@FrankHassanabad FrankHassanabad added Feature:Search Querying infrastructure in Kibana Team:AppServices Project:AsyncSearch Background search, partial results, async search services. labels Jul 29, 2021
@elasticmachine
Copy link
Contributor

Pinging @elastic/kibana-app-services (Team:AppServices)

@exalate-issue-sync exalate-issue-sync bot added impact:low Addressing this issue will have a low level of impact on the quality/strength of our product. loe:small Small Level of Effort labels Jul 29, 2021
FrankHassanabad added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 27, 2021
…flake, boilerplate, and technique choices (#116211)

## Summary

Fixes flake tests of:
#115918
#103273
#108640
#109447
#100630
#94535
#104260

Security solution has been using `bsearch` and has encountered flake in various forms. Different developers have been fixing the flake in a few odd ways (myself included) which aren't 100%. This PR introduces a once-in-for-all REST API retry service called `bsearch` which will query `bsearch` and if `bsearch` is not completed because of async occurring due to slower CI runtimes it will continuously call into the `bsearch` with the correct API to ensure it gets a complete response before returning.


## Usage

Anyone can use this service like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
}
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

If you're using a custom auth then you can set that beforehand like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const supertestWithoutAuth = getService('supertestWithoutAuth');
const supertest supertestWithoutAuth.auth(username, password);
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
  }
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

## Misconceptions in the tests leading to flake
* Can you just call the bsearch REST API and it will always return data first time? Not always true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` will give you back an async reference and then your test will blow up.
* Can we wrap the REST API in `retry` to fix the flake? Not always but mostly true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` could return the async version continuously which could then fail your test. It's also tedious to tell everyone in code reviews to wrap everything in `retry` instead of just fixing it with a service as well as inform new people why we are constantly wrapping these tests in `retry`.
* Can we manually parse the `bsearch` if it has `async` for each test? This is true but is error prone and I did this for one test and it's ugly and I had issues as I have to wrap 2 things in `retry` and test several conditions. Also it's harder for people to read the tests rather than just reading there is a service call. Also people in code reviews missed where I had bugs with it. Also lots of boiler plate.
* Can we just increase the timeout with `wait_for_completion_timeout` and the tests will pass for sure then? Not true today but maybe true later, as this hasn't been added as plumbing yet. See this [open ticket](#107241). Even if it is and we increase the timeout to a very large number bsearch might return with an `async` or you might want to test the `async` path. Either way, if/when we add the ability we can increase it within 1 spot which is this service for everyone rather than going to each individual test to add it. If/when it's added if people don't use the bsearch service we can remove it later if we find this is deterministic enough and no one wants to test bsearch features with their strategies down the road.

## Manual test of bsearch service
If you want to manually watch the bsearch operate as if the CI system is running slow or to cause an `async` manually you manually modify this setting here:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/master/src/plugins/data/server/search/strategies/ese_search/request_utils.ts#L61

To be of a lower number such as `1ms` and then you will see it enter the `async` code within `bsearch` consistently

## Reference PRs
We cannot set the wait_for_complete just yet
#107241 so we decided this was the best way to reduce flake for testing for now. 

### Checklist

- [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios
FrankHassanabad added a commit to FrankHassanabad/kibana that referenced this issue Oct 27, 2021
…flake, boilerplate, and technique choices (elastic#116211)

## Summary

Fixes flake tests of:
elastic#115918
elastic#103273
elastic#108640
elastic#109447
elastic#100630
elastic#94535
elastic#104260

Security solution has been using `bsearch` and has encountered flake in various forms. Different developers have been fixing the flake in a few odd ways (myself included) which aren't 100%. This PR introduces a once-in-for-all REST API retry service called `bsearch` which will query `bsearch` and if `bsearch` is not completed because of async occurring due to slower CI runtimes it will continuously call into the `bsearch` with the correct API to ensure it gets a complete response before returning.

## Usage

Anyone can use this service like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
}
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

If you're using a custom auth then you can set that beforehand like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const supertestWithoutAuth = getService('supertestWithoutAuth');
const supertest supertestWithoutAuth.auth(username, password);
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
  }
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

## Misconceptions in the tests leading to flake
* Can you just call the bsearch REST API and it will always return data first time? Not always true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` will give you back an async reference and then your test will blow up.
* Can we wrap the REST API in `retry` to fix the flake? Not always but mostly true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` could return the async version continuously which could then fail your test. It's also tedious to tell everyone in code reviews to wrap everything in `retry` instead of just fixing it with a service as well as inform new people why we are constantly wrapping these tests in `retry`.
* Can we manually parse the `bsearch` if it has `async` for each test? This is true but is error prone and I did this for one test and it's ugly and I had issues as I have to wrap 2 things in `retry` and test several conditions. Also it's harder for people to read the tests rather than just reading there is a service call. Also people in code reviews missed where I had bugs with it. Also lots of boiler plate.
* Can we just increase the timeout with `wait_for_completion_timeout` and the tests will pass for sure then? Not true today but maybe true later, as this hasn't been added as plumbing yet. See this [open ticket](elastic#107241). Even if it is and we increase the timeout to a very large number bsearch might return with an `async` or you might want to test the `async` path. Either way, if/when we add the ability we can increase it within 1 spot which is this service for everyone rather than going to each individual test to add it. If/when it's added if people don't use the bsearch service we can remove it later if we find this is deterministic enough and no one wants to test bsearch features with their strategies down the road.

## Manual test of bsearch service
If you want to manually watch the bsearch operate as if the CI system is running slow or to cause an `async` manually you manually modify this setting here:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/master/src/plugins/data/server/search/strategies/ese_search/request_utils.ts#L61

To be of a lower number such as `1ms` and then you will see it enter the `async` code within `bsearch` consistently

## Reference PRs
We cannot set the wait_for_complete just yet
elastic#107241 so we decided this was the best way to reduce flake for testing for now.

### Checklist

- [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios

# Conflicts:
#	x-pack/test/api_integration/apis/security_solution/hosts.ts
FrankHassanabad added a commit to FrankHassanabad/kibana that referenced this issue Oct 27, 2021
…flake, boilerplate, and technique choices (elastic#116211)

## Summary

Fixes flake tests of:
elastic#115918
elastic#103273
elastic#108640
elastic#109447
elastic#100630
elastic#94535
elastic#104260

Security solution has been using `bsearch` and has encountered flake in various forms. Different developers have been fixing the flake in a few odd ways (myself included) which aren't 100%. This PR introduces a once-in-for-all REST API retry service called `bsearch` which will query `bsearch` and if `bsearch` is not completed because of async occurring due to slower CI runtimes it will continuously call into the `bsearch` with the correct API to ensure it gets a complete response before returning.


## Usage

Anyone can use this service like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
}
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

If you're using a custom auth then you can set that beforehand like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const supertestWithoutAuth = getService('supertestWithoutAuth');
const supertest supertestWithoutAuth.auth(username, password);
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
  }
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

## Misconceptions in the tests leading to flake
* Can you just call the bsearch REST API and it will always return data first time? Not always true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` will give you back an async reference and then your test will blow up.
* Can we wrap the REST API in `retry` to fix the flake? Not always but mostly true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` could return the async version continuously which could then fail your test. It's also tedious to tell everyone in code reviews to wrap everything in `retry` instead of just fixing it with a service as well as inform new people why we are constantly wrapping these tests in `retry`.
* Can we manually parse the `bsearch` if it has `async` for each test? This is true but is error prone and I did this for one test and it's ugly and I had issues as I have to wrap 2 things in `retry` and test several conditions. Also it's harder for people to read the tests rather than just reading there is a service call. Also people in code reviews missed where I had bugs with it. Also lots of boiler plate.
* Can we just increase the timeout with `wait_for_completion_timeout` and the tests will pass for sure then? Not true today but maybe true later, as this hasn't been added as plumbing yet. See this [open ticket](elastic#107241). Even if it is and we increase the timeout to a very large number bsearch might return with an `async` or you might want to test the `async` path. Either way, if/when we add the ability we can increase it within 1 spot which is this service for everyone rather than going to each individual test to add it. If/when it's added if people don't use the bsearch service we can remove it later if we find this is deterministic enough and no one wants to test bsearch features with their strategies down the road.

## Manual test of bsearch service
If you want to manually watch the bsearch operate as if the CI system is running slow or to cause an `async` manually you manually modify this setting here:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/master/src/plugins/data/server/search/strategies/ese_search/request_utils.ts#L61

To be of a lower number such as `1ms` and then you will see it enter the `async` code within `bsearch` consistently

## Reference PRs
We cannot set the wait_for_complete just yet
elastic#107241 so we decided this was the best way to reduce flake for testing for now. 

### Checklist

- [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios
FrankHassanabad added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 27, 2021
…flake, boilerplate, and technique choices (#116211) (#116500)

## Summary

Fixes flake tests of:
#115918
#103273
#108640
#109447
#100630
#94535
#104260

Security solution has been using `bsearch` and has encountered flake in various forms. Different developers have been fixing the flake in a few odd ways (myself included) which aren't 100%. This PR introduces a once-in-for-all REST API retry service called `bsearch` which will query `bsearch` and if `bsearch` is not completed because of async occurring due to slower CI runtimes it will continuously call into the `bsearch` with the correct API to ensure it gets a complete response before returning.

## Usage

Anyone can use this service like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
}
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

If you're using a custom auth then you can set that beforehand like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const supertestWithoutAuth = getService('supertestWithoutAuth');
const supertest supertestWithoutAuth.auth(username, password);
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
  }
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

## Misconceptions in the tests leading to flake
* Can you just call the bsearch REST API and it will always return data first time? Not always true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` will give you back an async reference and then your test will blow up.
* Can we wrap the REST API in `retry` to fix the flake? Not always but mostly true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` could return the async version continuously which could then fail your test. It's also tedious to tell everyone in code reviews to wrap everything in `retry` instead of just fixing it with a service as well as inform new people why we are constantly wrapping these tests in `retry`.
* Can we manually parse the `bsearch` if it has `async` for each test? This is true but is error prone and I did this for one test and it's ugly and I had issues as I have to wrap 2 things in `retry` and test several conditions. Also it's harder for people to read the tests rather than just reading there is a service call. Also people in code reviews missed where I had bugs with it. Also lots of boiler plate.
* Can we just increase the timeout with `wait_for_completion_timeout` and the tests will pass for sure then? Not true today but maybe true later, as this hasn't been added as plumbing yet. See this [open ticket](#107241). Even if it is and we increase the timeout to a very large number bsearch might return with an `async` or you might want to test the `async` path. Either way, if/when we add the ability we can increase it within 1 spot which is this service for everyone rather than going to each individual test to add it. If/when it's added if people don't use the bsearch service we can remove it later if we find this is deterministic enough and no one wants to test bsearch features with their strategies down the road.

## Manual test of bsearch service
If you want to manually watch the bsearch operate as if the CI system is running slow or to cause an `async` manually you manually modify this setting here:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/master/src/plugins/data/server/search/strategies/ese_search/request_utils.ts#L61

To be of a lower number such as `1ms` and then you will see it enter the `async` code within `bsearch` consistently

## Reference PRs
We cannot set the wait_for_complete just yet
#107241 so we decided this was the best way to reduce flake for testing for now.

### Checklist

- [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios

# Conflicts:
#	x-pack/test/api_integration/apis/security_solution/hosts.ts
FrankHassanabad added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 28, 2021
…flake, boilerplate, and technique choices (#116211) (#116514)

## Summary

Fixes flake tests of:
#115918
#103273
#108640
#109447
#100630
#94535
#104260

Security solution has been using `bsearch` and has encountered flake in various forms. Different developers have been fixing the flake in a few odd ways (myself included) which aren't 100%. This PR introduces a once-in-for-all REST API retry service called `bsearch` which will query `bsearch` and if `bsearch` is not completed because of async occurring due to slower CI runtimes it will continuously call into the `bsearch` with the correct API to ensure it gets a complete response before returning.


## Usage

Anyone can use this service like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
}
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

If you're using a custom auth then you can set that beforehand like so:
```ts
const bsearch = getService('bsearch');
const supertestWithoutAuth = getService('supertestWithoutAuth');
const supertest supertestWithoutAuth.auth(username, password);
const response = await bsearch.send<MyType>({
 supertest,
 options: {
   defaultIndex: ['large_volume_dns_data'],
  }
  strategy: 'securitySolutionSearchStrategy',
});
```

## Misconceptions in the tests leading to flake
* Can you just call the bsearch REST API and it will always return data first time? Not always true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` will give you back an async reference and then your test will blow up.
* Can we wrap the REST API in `retry` to fix the flake? Not always but mostly true, as when CI slows down or data increases `bsearch` could return the async version continuously which could then fail your test. It's also tedious to tell everyone in code reviews to wrap everything in `retry` instead of just fixing it with a service as well as inform new people why we are constantly wrapping these tests in `retry`.
* Can we manually parse the `bsearch` if it has `async` for each test? This is true but is error prone and I did this for one test and it's ugly and I had issues as I have to wrap 2 things in `retry` and test several conditions. Also it's harder for people to read the tests rather than just reading there is a service call. Also people in code reviews missed where I had bugs with it. Also lots of boiler plate.
* Can we just increase the timeout with `wait_for_completion_timeout` and the tests will pass for sure then? Not true today but maybe true later, as this hasn't been added as plumbing yet. See this [open ticket](#107241). Even if it is and we increase the timeout to a very large number bsearch might return with an `async` or you might want to test the `async` path. Either way, if/when we add the ability we can increase it within 1 spot which is this service for everyone rather than going to each individual test to add it. If/when it's added if people don't use the bsearch service we can remove it later if we find this is deterministic enough and no one wants to test bsearch features with their strategies down the road.

## Manual test of bsearch service
If you want to manually watch the bsearch operate as if the CI system is running slow or to cause an `async` manually you manually modify this setting here:
https://github.com/elastic/kibana/blob/master/src/plugins/data/server/search/strategies/ese_search/request_utils.ts#L61

To be of a lower number such as `1ms` and then you will see it enter the `async` code within `bsearch` consistently

## Reference PRs
We cannot set the wait_for_complete just yet
#107241 so we decided this was the best way to reduce flake for testing for now. 

### Checklist

- [x] [Unit or functional tests](https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/kibana/master/development-tests.html) were updated or added to match the most common scenarios

Co-authored-by: Kibana Machine <42973632+kibanamachine@users.noreply.github.com>
@lukasolson
Copy link
Member

I just did a little test locally and I'm not sure when this was fixed, but you can definitely override this value when calling data.search both from the client & server now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature:Search Querying infrastructure in Kibana impact:low Addressing this issue will have a low level of impact on the quality/strength of our product. loe:small Small Level of Effort NeededFor:Security Project:AsyncSearch Background search, partial results, async search services.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants