Open Stack

> On 12/04/2018 06:13 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
>>
>>> Before we start or proceed with the discussion in QA, i would like
>>> to get the nova(placement) team opinion on adding the placement
>>> support in Tempest. Obviously, we should not duplicate the testing
>>> effort between what existing gabbi tests cover or what going to be
>>> added in Tempest which we can take care while adding the new tests.
>>
>> My feeling on this is that what should be showing up in tempest with
>> regard to placement tests are things that demonstrate and prove end
>> to end scenarios in which placement is involved as a critical part,
>> but is in the background. For example, things like the emerging minimal
>> bandwidth functionality that involves all three of nova, placement
>> and neutron.
>>
>> I don't think we need extensive testing in Tempest of the placement
>> API itself, as that's already well covered by the existing
>> functional tests, nor do I think it makes much sense to cover the
>> common scheduling scenarios between nova and placement as those are
>> also well covered and will continue to be covered even with
>> placement extracted [1].
>>
>> Existing Tempests tests that do things like launching, resizing,
>> migrating servers already touch placement so may be sufficient. If
>> we wanted to make these more complete adding verification of
>> resource providers and their inventories before and after the tests
>> might be useful.
>
> Fully agree with Chris' assessment on this.

I don't disagree either. However, I do think that there are cases where
it may make sense to be _able_ to hit the placement endpoint from
tempest in order to verify that certain things are happening, even in a
scenario that involves other services.

For example, if we're testing nova's request filter stuff, we may very
well need to hit the placement endpoint to validate that aggregate
information is being mirrored, and/or that adding a trait to a provider
properly results in some scheduling behavior. So, if the question is
"should a tempest test be able to hit the placement endpoint?" I would
say "yes". If the question is "should tempest have tests that only hit
placement to validate proper behavior", I'd agree that functional tests
in placement probably cover that sufficiently. I *think* that gmann's
question in the email was actually about placement endpoint support,
which is the former, and I think is probably legit.

--Dan