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

Bug 1822744: Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress #7265

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 16, 2020
Merged

Bug 1822744: Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress #7265

merged 1 commit into from Dec 16, 2020

Conversation

bipuladh
Copy link
Contributor

@bipuladh bipuladh commented Nov 19, 2020 •
edited

No description provided.

@bipuladh bipuladh changed the title Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress [WIP] Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress Nov 19, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. component/ceph Related to ceph-storage-plugin labels Nov 19, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the component/core Related to console core functionality label Nov 19, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 19, 2020
@bipuladh bipuladh force-pushed the install_tests branch 2 times, most recently from af94306 to 8d6c7a9 Compare November 23, 2020 03:05
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added component/dashboard Related to dashboard component/shared Related to console-shared labels Nov 23, 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 Dec 7, 2020
@bipuladh bipuladh changed the title [WIP] Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress Dec 7, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Dec 7, 2020
dtaylor113
dtaylor113 requested changes Dec 8, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dtaylor113 dtaylor113 left a comment •
edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. There is some duplicate code which could use helper methods or perhaps new catalog/operator view.
There is also a lot of waiting which goes against Cypress best practices and can lead to many test flakes:
https://docs.cypress.io/guides/references/best-practices.html#Unnecessary-Waiting
https://medium.com/better-programming/dont-use-wait-in-your-cypress-tests-cbe14746da71

frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/helpers/installation.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/support/index.ts Outdated
cy.byTestID('Operator recommended namespace:-radio-input').should('be.checked');
cy.byTestID('enable-monitoring').click();
cy.byTestID('install-operator').click();
cy.byTestID('success-icon', { timeout: 180000 }).should('be.visible');
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are we really expecting to wait 3 minutes for this to succeed? Is there a cy.exec('oc ...') cmd we can call to check status -it's sometimes faster than the UI.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

cy.exec unlike other commands would not get retried in case of failure. We would have to come up with a method that polls the CLI. Even if we go that route we are shaving 15 to 30 seconds max.

frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/support/index.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/support/index.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/support/index.ts Outdated
// eslint-disable-next-line cypress/no-unnecessary-waiting
cy.wait(10000);

return cy.byTestID('resource-status').contains('Ready', { timeout: 900000 });
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We're expecting to wait 15 minutes for a Ready status? Is there a cy.exec('oc ...') cmd we can call to check status? Something like this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Again similar to checking if the Operator is installed, I think this would be better than to poll the CLI.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok, I think we might have to come up with a better solution, we'll see how often this test 'flakes'.

frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/tests/add-capacity.spec.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/tests/add-capacity.spec.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
frontend/packages/ceph-storage-plugin/integration-tests-cypress/tests/ocp-dashboards.spec.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bipuladh bipuladh force-pushed the install_tests branch 2 times, most recently from 9c52252 to 0a759d6 Compare December 10, 2020 08:36
@bipuladh
Adds Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress
c6bd8b6 
Adds Storage cluster expansion Test to Cypress
Add tests for PVC Expansion
Add tests for OCS Persistent Storage Dashboard
dtaylor113
dtaylor113 approved these changes Dec 10, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dtaylor113 dtaylor113 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!

@rawagner
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 15, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bipuladh, dtaylor113, rawagner

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 15, 2020
@bipuladh bipuladh changed the title Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress Bug 1822744: Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress Dec 15, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/severity-low Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is low for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 15, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Dec 15, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@bipuladh: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1822744, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.7.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.7.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

In response to this:

Bug 1822744: Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress

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.

@bipuladh
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

2 similar comments
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit f6130f6 into openshift:master Dec 16, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@bipuladh: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 1822744 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1822744: Add Internal Mode Installation Test to Cypress

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-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2020
Merged
@spadgett spadgett added this to the v4.7 milestone Jan 7, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dtaylor113 dtaylor113 dtaylor113 approved these changes

@cloudbehl cloudbehl Awaiting requested review from cloudbehl

@spadgett spadgett Awaiting requested review from spadgett

Assignees

@rawagner rawagner

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-low Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is low for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. component/ceph Related to ceph-storage-plugin component/core Related to console core functionality component/dashboard Related to dashboard component/shared Related to console-shared lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v4.7
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@bipuladh @rawagner @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-bot @dtaylor113 @spadgett @openshift-merge-robot