[openstack-dev] [tripleo] pingtest vs tempest
Andrea Frittoli
andrea.frittoli at gmail.com
Tue Apr 18 09:26:43 UTC 2017
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:07 AM Arx Cruz <arxcruz at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:42 AM, Steven Hardy <shardy at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 12:48:32PM -0400, Justin Kilpatrick wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Ben Nemec <openstack at nemebean.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > Tempest isn't really either of those things. According to another
>> message
>> > > in this thread it takes around 15 minutes to run just the smoke tests.
>>
>
The smoke filter may take 15min to run, but it is possible to curate a
TripleO own
filter which could take less. It really depends in which area you see
regressions mostly,
but I would assume the most important bit for you is that services are
running and
working fine with each other, so and a couple of scenario tests may be
enough to prove that.
If there is no existing test that works for you in Tempest, you might even
write your
own Tempest plugin - that is as long as you are satisfied with API driven
checks.
andreaf
> > > That's unacceptable for a lot of our CI jobs.
>> >
>>
>
> I rather spend 15 minutes running tempest than add a regression or a new
> bug, which already happen in the past.
>
>
>> > Ben, is the issue merely the time it takes? Is it the affect that time
>> > taken has on hardware availability?
>>
>> It's both, but the main constraint is the infra job timeout, which is
>> about
>> 2.5hrs - if you look at our current jobs many regularly get close to (and
>> sometimes exceed this), so we just don't have the time budget available to
>> run exhasutive tests every commit.
>>
>
> We have green light from infra to increase the job timeout to 5 hours, we
> do that in our periodic full tempest job.
>
>
>>
>> > Should we focus on how much testing we can get into N time period?
>> > Then how do we decide an optimal N
>> > for our constraints?
>>
>> Well yeah, but that's pretty much how/why we ended up with pingtest, it's
>> simple, fast, and provides an efficient way to do smoke tests, e.g
>> creating
>> just one heat resource is enough to prove multiple OpenStack services are
>> running, as well as the DB/RPC etc etc.
>>
>> > I've been working on a full up functional test for OpenStack CI builds
>> > for a long time now, it works but takes
>> > more than 10 hours. IF you're interested in results kick through to
>> > Kibana here [0]. Let me know off list if you
>> > have any issues, the presentation of this data is all experimental
>> still.
>>
>> This kind of thing is great, and I'd support more exhaustive testing via
>> periodic jobs etc, but the reality is we need to focus on "bang for buck"
>> e.g the deepest possible coverage in the most minimal amount of time for
>> our per-commit tests - we rely on the project gates to provide a full API
>> surface test, and we need to focus on more basic things like "did the
>> service
>> start", and "is the API accessible". Simple crud operations on a subset
>> of
>> the API's is totally fine for this IMO, whether via pingtest or some other
>> means.
>>
>>
> Right now we do have a periodic job running full tempest, with a few
> skips, and because of the lack of tempest tests in the patches, it's being
> pretty hard to keep it stable enough to have a 100% pass, and of course,
> also the installation very often fails (like in the last five days).
> For example, [1] is the latest run we have in periodic job that we get
> results from tempest, and we have 114 failures that was caused by some new
> code/change, and I have no idea which one was, just looking at the
> failures, I can notice that smoke tests plus minimum basic scenario tests
> would catch these failures and the developer could fix it and make me happy
> :)
> Now I have to spend several hours installing and debugging each one of
> those tests to identify where/why it fails.
> Before this run, we got 100% pass, but unfortunately I don't have the
> results anymore, it was removed already from logs.openstack.org
>
>
>
>> Steve
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
> [1]
> http://logs.openstack.org/periodic/periodic-tripleo-ci-centos-7-ovb-nonha-tempest-oooq/0072651/logs/oooq/stackviz/#/stdin
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20170418/3a47891d/attachment.html>
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list