Open Stack

On Sun, May 5, 2019 at 12:19 AM Ghanshyam Mann <gmann at ghanshyammann.com>
wrote:

> Current integrated-gate jobs (tempest-full) is not so stable for various
> bugs specially timeout. We tried
> to improve it via filtering the slow tests in the separate tempest-slow
> job but the situation has not been improved much.
>
> We talked about the Ideas to make it more stable and fast for projects
> especially when failure is not
> related to each project. We are planning to split the integrated-gate
> template (only tempest-full job as
> first step) per related services.
>
> Idea:
> - Run only dependent service tests on project gate.
> - Tempest gate will keep running all the services tests as the integrated
> gate at a centeralized  place without any change in the current job.
> - Each project can run the below mentioned template.
> - All below template will be defined and maintained by QA team.
>
> I would like to know each 6 services which run integrated-gate jobs
>
> 1."Integrated-gate-networking" (job to run on neutron gate)
>  Tests to run in this template: neutron APIs , nova APIs,  keystone APIs ?
> All scenario currently running in tempest-full in the same way ( means
> non-slow and in serial)
> Improvement for neutron gate: exlcude the cinder API tests,  glance API
> tests, swift API tests,
>
> 2."Integrated-gate-storage" (job to run on cinder gate, glance gate)
> Tests to run in this template: Cinder APIs , Glance APIs, Swift APIs, Nova
> APIs and All scenario currently running in tempest-full in the same way (
> means non-slow and in serial)
> Improvement for cinder, glance gate: excluded the neutron APIs tests,
> Keystone APIs tests
>
> 3. "Integrated-gate-object-storage" (job to run on swift gate)
> Tests to run in this template: Cinder APIs , Glance APIs, Swift APIs and
> All scenario currently running in tempest-full in the same way ( means
> non-slow and in serial)
> Improvement for swift gate: excluded the neutron APIs tests, - Keystone
> APIs tests, - Nova APIs tests.
> Note: swift does not run integrated-gate as of now.
>
> 4. "Integrated-gate-compute" (job to run on Nova gate)
> tests to run is : Nova APIs, Cinder APIs , Glance APIs ?, neutron APIs and
> All scenario currently running in tempest-full in same way ( means non-slow
> and in serial)
> Improvement for Nova gate: excluded the swift APIs tests(not running in
> current job but in future, it might), Keystone API tests.
>
> 5. "Integrated-gate-identity" (job to run on keystone gate)
> Tests to run is : all as all project use keystone, we might need to run
> all tests as it is running in integrated-gate.
> But does keystone is being unsed differently by all services? if no then,
> is it enough to run only single service tests say Nova or neutron ?
>
> 6. "Integrated-gate-placement" (job to run on placement gate)
> Tests to run in this template: Nova APIs tests, Neutron APIs tests +
> scenario tests + any new service depends on placement APIs
>  Improvement for placement gate: excluded the  glance APIs tests, cinder
> APIs tests, swift APIs tests, keystone APIs tests
>
> Thoughts on this approach?
>
> The important point is we must not lose the coverage of integrated testing
> per project. So I would like to
> get each project view if we are missing any dependency (proposed tests
> removal) in above proposed templates.
>
> - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/qa-train-ptg
>
> -gmann
>
>
>
For the "Integrated-gate-identity", I have a slight worry that we might
lose some coverage with this change. I am unsure of how varied the use of
Keystone is outside of KeystoneMiddleware (i.e. token validation)
consumption that all services perform, Heat (not part of the integrated
gate) and it's usage of Trusts, and some newer emerging uses such as "look
up limit data" (potentially in Train, would be covered by Nova). Worst
case, we could run all the integrated tests for Keystone changes (at least
initially) until we have higher confidence and minimize the tests once we
have a clearer audit of how the services use Keystone. The changes would
speed up/minimize the usage for the other services directly and Keystone
can follow down the line.

I want to be as close to 100% sure we're not going to suddenly break
everyone because of some change we land. Keystone fortunately and
unfortunately sits below most other services in an OpenStack deployment and
is heavily relied throughout almost every single request.

--Morgan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190506/a9518400/attachment.html>