Open Stack

I would say smoke tests, and at least the minimum scenario tests.
Smoke tests takes 14 minutes (113 tests) to run, and I can check how long
it takes the minimum scenario tests later. So it won't take a long time
running.

Kind regards,
Arx Cruz

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:44 PM, Andrea Frittoli <andrea.frittoli at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I don't really have much context in what the decision is going to be based
> on here,
> so I'll just add some random comments here and there.
>
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 12:48 PM Arx Cruz <arxcruz at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Having tempest running will allow these jobs to appear in
>> openstack-health system as well.
>>
>
> I agree that's a plus. It's also rather easy to produce subunit from
> whatever you
> are using to run tests, and that's all you need in fact to get data into
> open stack-health
> without touching the existing infrastructure. So in case you decide not to
> use Tempest,
> open stack-health can still be on the list.
>
>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Justin Kilpatrick <jkilpatr at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Maybe I'm getting a little off topic with this question, but why was
>> Tempest removed last time?
>>
>> I'm not well versed in the history of this discussion, but from what I
>> understand Tempest in the gate has
>> been an off and on again thing for a while but I've never heard the
>> story of why it got removed.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Chris Dent <cdent+os at anticdent.org>
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 6 Apr 2017, Sagi Shnaidman wrote:
>> >
>> >> It may be useful to run a "limited edition" of API tests that maximize
>> >> coverage and don't duplicate, for example just to check service working
>> >> basically, without covering all its functionality. It will take very
>> >> little
>> >> time (i.e. 5 tests for each service) and will give a general picture of
>> >> deployment success. It will cover fields that are not covered by
>> pingtest
>> >> as well.
>>
>> >
>>
>>
> We have a smoke attribute here an there, but it's not well curated at all,
> so you're
> probably better off maintaining your own list.
> Since presumably you're more interested in verifying that a deployed cloud
> is
> functional - as opposed to verify specific APIs are working properly - you
> may want
> to look at scenario tests, where with a couple of test you can cover
> already a lot of
> basic stuff, e.g. if you can boot a server from a volume with an image
> from glance,
> and ssh into it, you have proven a lot already about the general health of
> your cloud.
>
>
>> >
>> > It's sound like using some parts of tempest is perhaps the desired
>> > thing here but in case a "limited edition" test against the APIs to
>> > do what amounts to a smoke test is desired, it might be worthwhile
>> > to investigate using gabbi[1] and its command line gabbi-run[2] tool for
>> > some fairly simple and readable tests that can describe a sequence
>> > of API interactions. There are lots of tools that can do the same
>> > thing, so gabbi may not be the right choice but it's there as an
>> > option.
>> >
>> > The telemetry group had (an may still have) some integration tests
>> > that use gabbi files to integrate ceilometer, heat (starting some
>> > vms), aodh and gnocchi and confirm that the expected flow happened.
>> > Since the earlier raw scripts I think there's been some integration
>> > with tempest, but gabbi files are still used[3].
>> >
>> > If this might be useful and I can help out, please ask.
>> >
>> > [1] http://gabbi.readthedocs.io/
>> > [2] http://gabbi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/runner.html
>> > [3]
>> > https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer/tree/master/
>> ceilometer/tests/integration
>> >
>> > --
>> > Chris Dent                 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯           https://anticdent.org/
>> > freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:
>> unsubscribe
>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> >
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:
>> unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> ______________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:
>> unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170406/355a99b2/attachment.html>