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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

e2e: add cargo-based e2e test and run it after the instance is stood up #202

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jan 31, 2020
Merged

e2e: add cargo-based e2e test and run it after the instance is stood up #202

merged 3 commits into from Jan 31, 2020

Conversation

vrutkovs
Copy link
Member

@vrutkovs vrutkovs commented Jan 31, 2020 •
edited

Add several tests which use reqwest to ensure returned test data graph is valid. These tests won't run during cargo test, instead they'd be a part of e2e suite

Part of OTA-103

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 31, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 31, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 31, 2020
vrutkovs
vrutkovs commented Jan 31, 2020
View reviewed changes
hack/e2e.sh Outdated
curl --header 'Accept:application/json' "${GRAPH_URL}"
# Run e2e tests
cd ../../graph-builder
cargo test --features test-e2e e2e --no-default-features -- --nocapture
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This would install test dependencies during the test run, which is suboptimal. I'll rework this in /release repo to ensure a test image is built first

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure what you mean by "install test dependencies", please explain.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test starts with a container built from Dockerfile.builder, so it has rustc and cargo installed, but doesn't have test prebuilt. So when cargo test is run here it would download crates and compile test - log

I'll update this to have test built along with other artifacts in follow up PRs

@vrutkovs vrutkovs force-pushed the initial-e2e-test branch 2 times, most recently from f5288a4 to 7d2cb9e Compare January 31, 2020 11:03
@vrutkovs
Copy link
Member Author

/cc @steveej @wking

steveej
steveej suggested changes Jan 31, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@steveej steveej left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a few nitpicks in the comments.

Extra note:
I'm not a fan of our using and with this PR duplicating the expected hashes from the manually maintained test repositories, see e.g. here. A first step is to have a common definition of these images and their expected hashes somewhere in shared module. We can postpone this to a future PR but I did want to note this down somewhere.

graph-builder/tests/mod.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
graph-builder/tests/mod.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
steveej
steveej approved these changes Jan 31, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@steveej steveej left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

Thanks!

I'm not sure if you wanted to do something about #202 (comment) in this PR or postpone all of the things you mentioned, so:

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 31, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 31, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: steveeJ, vrutkovs

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@vrutkovs
Copy link
Member Author

I'm not sure if you wanted to do something about #202 (comment) in this PR or postpone all of the things you mentioned, so:

This needs to happen in two repos - first proper images built in openshift/release then these images would be used in cincinnati's e2e.

I'll keep it on hold until e2e passes just to be sure

@vrutkovs
Copy link
Member Author

e2e passed \o/

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jan 31, 2020
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

3 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-bot
Copy link

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@vrutkovs
Copy link
Member Author

/refresh

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vrutkovs: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
ci/prow/rustfmt-1.37.0 71a2b3f4ba9066ae978bddf18de49979ca0887b1 link /test rustfmt-1.37.0
ci/prow/rustfmt-1.38.0 ec8b65d link /test rustfmt-1.38.0

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@vrutkovs
Copy link
Member Author

/override ci/prow/rustfmt-1.38.0

Outdated test

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

@vrutkovs: Overrode contexts on behalf of vrutkovs: ci/prow/rustfmt-1.38.0

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/rustfmt-1.38.0

Outdated test

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit a03ccf3 into openshift:master Jan 31, 2020
This was referenced Jan 31, 2020
Closed
Merged
@vrutkovs vrutkovs deleted the initial-e2e-test branch September 16, 2020 22:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@steveej steveej steveej approved these changes

@jzelinskie jzelinskie Awaiting requested review from jzelinskie

@LalatenduMohanty LalatenduMohanty Awaiting requested review from LalatenduMohanty

@wking wking Awaiting requested review from wking

Assignees

@steveej steveej

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@vrutkovs @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-bot @steveej @openshift-merge-robot