CSPL-949: Refactor of secret test cases #298
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,135 @@ | ||
| // Copyright (c) 2018-2021 Splunk Inc. All rights reserved. | ||
| // | ||
| // Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); | ||
| // you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. | ||
| // You may obtain a copy of the License at | ||
| // | ||
| // http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
| // | ||
| // Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software | ||
| // distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, | ||
| // WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
| // See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
| // limitations under the License. | ||
| package secret | ||
|
|
||
| import ( | ||
| "fmt" | ||
|
|
||
| . "github.com/onsi/ginkgo" | ||
| . "github.com/onsi/gomega" | ||
|
|
||
| splcommon "github.com/splunk/splunk-operator/pkg/splunk/common" | ||
| "github.com/splunk/splunk-operator/test/testenv" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| var _ = Describe("Secret Test for SVA C3", func() { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. As discussed, it would be prudent to think of the overall hierarchy of the testing source code taking into consideration features, utilities, SVA's etc to optimize the number of lines of code, reduce complexity and achieve maximum code readability. If already discussed, please ignore. There was a problem hiding this comment. This change is in that direction. |
||
|
|
||
| var deployment *testenv.Deployment | ||
|
|
||
| BeforeEach(func() { | ||
| var err error | ||
| deployment, err = testenvInstance.NewDeployment(testenv.RandomDNSName(3)) | ||
| Expect(err).To(Succeed(), "Unable to create deployment") | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| AfterEach(func() { | ||
| // When a test spec failed, skip the teardown so we can troubleshoot. | ||
| if CurrentGinkgoTestDescription().Failed { | ||
| testenvInstance.SkipTeardown = true | ||
| } | ||
| if deployment != nil { | ||
| deployment.Teardown() | ||
| } | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| Context("Clustered deployment (C3 - clustered indexer, search head cluster)", func() { | ||
| It("secret: secret update on indexers and search head cluster", func() { | ||
|
|
||
| /* Test Scenario | ||
pdhanoya-splunk marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| 1. Update Secrets Data | ||
| 2. Verify New versioned secret are created with correct value. | ||
| 3. Verify new secrets are mounted on pods. | ||
| 4. Verify New Secrets are present in server.conf (Pass4SymmKey) */ | ||
|
|
||
| // Download License File | ||
| licenseFilePath, err := testenv.DownloadFromS3Bucket() | ||
| Expect(err).To(Succeed(), "Unable to download license file") | ||
|
|
||
| // Create License Config Map | ||
| testenvInstance.CreateLicenseConfigMap(licenseFilePath) | ||
|
|
||
| err = deployment.DeploySingleSiteCluster(deployment.GetName(), 3, true) | ||
| Expect(err).To(Succeed(), "Unable to deploy cluster") | ||
|
|
||
| // Wait for License Master to be in READY status | ||
| testenv.LicenseMasterReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure that the cluster-master goes to Ready phase | ||
| testenv.ClusterMasterReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure indexers go to Ready phase | ||
| testenv.SingleSiteIndexersReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure search head cluster go to Ready phase | ||
| testenv.SearchHeadClusterReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify MC Pod is Ready | ||
| testenv.MCPodReady(testenvInstance.GetName(), deployment) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify RF SF is met | ||
| testenv.VerifyRFSFMet(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Get Current Secrets Struct | ||
| namespaceScopedSecretName := fmt.Sprintf(testenv.NamespaceScopedSecretObjectName, testenvInstance.GetName()) | ||
| secretStruct, err := testenv.GetSecretStruct(deployment, testenvInstance.GetName(), namespaceScopedSecretName) | ||
| Expect(err).To(Succeed(), "Unable to get secret struct") | ||
|
|
||
| // Update Secret Value on Secret Object | ||
| testenvInstance.Log.Info("Data in secret object", "data", secretStruct.Data) | ||
| modifiedHecToken := testenv.GetRandomeHECToken() | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. We already have APIs: generateHECToken - Generating a 36 byte HEC token Not necessary to use them, but we can maintain uniformity if we re-use them. There was a problem hiding this comment. generateHECToken is not callable outside of that file. So I had to create a new method. |
||
| modifedValue := testenv.RandomDNSName(10) | ||
| updatedSecretData := testenv.GetSecretDataMap(modifiedHecToken, modifedValue, modifedValue, modifedValue, modifedValue) | ||
|
|
||
| err = testenv.ModifySecretObject(deployment, testenvInstance.GetName(), namespaceScopedSecretName, updatedSecretData) | ||
| Expect(err).To(Succeed(), "Unable to update secret Object") | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure that Cluster Master goes to update phase | ||
| testenv.VerifyClusterMasterPhase(deployment, testenvInstance, splcommon.PhaseUpdating) | ||
|
|
||
| // Wait for License Master to be in READY status | ||
| testenv.LicenseMasterReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure that the cluster-master goes to Ready phase | ||
| testenv.ClusterMasterReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure indexers go to Ready phase | ||
| testenv.SingleSiteIndexersReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Ensure search head cluster go to Ready phase | ||
| testenv.SearchHeadClusterReady(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify MC Pod is Ready | ||
| testenv.MCPodReady(testenvInstance.GetName(), deployment) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify RF SF is met | ||
| testenv.VerifyRFSFMet(deployment, testenvInstance) | ||
|
|
||
| // Once Pods are READY check each versioned secret for updated secret keys | ||
| secretObjectNames := testenv.GetVersionedSecretNames(testenvInstance.GetName(), 2) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify Secrets on versioned secret objects | ||
| testenv.VerifySecretsOnSecretObjects(deployment, testenvInstance, secretObjectNames, updatedSecretData, true) | ||
|
|
||
| // Once Pods are READY check each pod for updated secret keys | ||
| verificationPods := testenv.DumpGetPods(testenvInstance.GetName()) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify secrets on pods | ||
| testenv.VerifySecretsOnPods(deployment, testenvInstance, verificationPods, updatedSecretData, true) | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify Pass4SymmKey Secrets on ServerConf on MC, LM Pods | ||
| testenv.VerifySplunkServerConfSecrets(deployment, testenvInstance, verificationPods, updatedSecretData, true) | ||
|
|
||
| }) | ||
| }) | ||
| }) | ||
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need the commented out line?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is just for reference I will remove it in future.