Add sharding to Blocks e2e tests

[lanej0]

Submission Review Guidelines:

• I have followed the WooCommerce Contributing Guidelines and the WordPress Coding Standards.
• I have checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change.
• I have reviewed my code for security best practices.
• Following the above guidelines will result in quick merges and clear and detailed feedback when appropriate.

Changes proposed in this Pull Request:

After sharding the Playwright test execution in core, and it working out well, this PR tries the same thing with the Blocks Playwright e2e tests -- hopefully speed up the execution a bit on these.

How to test the changes in this Pull Request:

Using the WooCommerce Testing Instructions Guide, include your detailed testing instructions:

Changelog entry

• Automatically create a changelog entry from the details below.

Significance

• Patch
• Minor
• Major

Type

• Fix - Fixes an existing bug
• Add - Adds functionality
• Update - Update existing functionality
• Dev - Development related task
• Tweak - A minor adjustment to the codebase
• Performance - Address performance issues
• Enhancement - Improvement to existing functionality

Message

Comment

[github-actions]

Test Results Summary

Commit SHA: 07ebd1e

Test 🧪	Passed ✅	Failed 🚨	Broken 🚧	Skipped ⏭️	Unknown ❔	Total 📊	Duration ⏱️
API Tests	259	0	0	2	0	261	0m 37s
E2E Tests	298	0	0	23	0	321	7m 25s

---

To view the full API test report, click here.
To view the full E2E test report, click here.
To view all test reports, visit the WooCommerce Test Reports Dashboard.

[github-actions]

Hi @gigitux,

Apart from reviewing the code changes, please make sure to review the testing instructions as well.

You can follow this guide to find out what good testing instructions should look like:
https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/wiki/Writing-high-quality-testing-instructions

[lanej0]

Hey @gigitux -- I took a shot at sharding the blocks e2e Playwright tests in order to speed up their execution. Any concerns with this approach?

[gigitux]

Hey @gigitux -- I took a shot at sharding the blocks e2e Playwright tests in order to speed up their execution. Any concerns with this approach?

No! It makes sense! Thanks for working on it! I would expect that everything should be green! I restarted this job because one test failed: https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/actions/runs/7822790714/job/21416655727

It should be just flaky 🤞

[gigitux]

It is still failing. It's weird. I'm trying to rebase with trunk.

[gigitux]

It seems that there is an issue... I'm investigating it!

[gigitux]

I'm able to replicate locally as well. I will fix it next week! It is not a regression, but we have to update the E2E test code. Not sure why only now the CI fails :/

If you check this report, you can notice that the test is flaky, but still the test passes 🤔.

[lanej0]

Great! Thanks for taking a look at that. Feel free to push changes to this PR, and we can merge once everything is green.

[gigitux]

Hi @lanej0, I address the failed E2E tests. Still, I'm not sure why it didn't fail before :/

@nielslange, I noticed that with this PR #43549, you updated price-filter.block_theme.side_effects.spec.ts: https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/pull/43549/files#diff-2e5f7ed9516b3c6a1aab17bf3f94322b62098f52d8b4d18a5753b5257458e465R86. On my local setup (and on the CI), the correct value is 1. Can you double-check?

[gigitux]

Thanks for your work, @lanej0. I'm pre-approving this PR, but let's wait for @nielslange feedback before merging this PR!

[nielslange]

Hi @lanej0, I address the failed E2E tests. Still, I'm not sure why it didn't fail before :/

@nielslange, I noticed that with this PR #43549, you updated price-filter.block_theme.side_effects.spec.ts: https://github.com/woocommerce/woocommerce/pull/43549/files#diff-2e5f7ed9516b3c6a1aab17bf3f94322b62098f52d8b4d18a5753b5257458e465R86. On my local setup (and on the CI), the correct value is 1. Can you double-check?

@gigitux I recall that I adjusted this test as it kept failing repeatedly. That said, I just started the local test environment, and for this test, there should be only one matching product. So, @lanej0's change looks good. Not sure what caused this test to fail earlier.

[gigitux]

@lanej0, feel free to merge the PR if you agree with my changes!