Allow testing multiple etcd releases #20013
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
area/testing
github_actions
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted filessee 22 files with indirect coverage changes @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #20013 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 68.81% 68.78% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 424 424
Lines 35744 35756 +12
==========================================
- Hits 24599 24595 -4
- Misses 9724 9739 +15
- Partials 1421 1422 +1 Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
Hmmmm not sure why CI is complaining about the note blockquote lines... |
| email_recipients: ${{ inputs.email }} | ||
| test_name: ${{ inputs.test }} | ||
| additional_parameters: |- | ||
| custom.duration = ${{ inputs.duration }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@marcus-hodgson-antithesis, on previous meetings you mentioned "source" parameters that would allow us to separate testing for different code branches. How can we pass it?
I don't see anything like this in https://antithesis.com/docs/using_antithesis/ci/.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can track this as a separate issue. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It should be a small change, we just need confirmation from @marcus-hodgson-antithesis
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@serathius, I know that passing it through the "additional_parameters" as "antithesis.source = ..." will work. I am not 100% about having "source: " be under the "with: " (but I will confirm).
But you are right, this should be under our documentation. Thanks for pointing this out!
nwnt
force-pushed
the
nwnt/test-multiple-etcd-releases
branch
from
558d94b to
8da3a61
Compare
nwnt
force-pushed
the
nwnt/test-multiple-etcd-releases
branch
from
8da3a61 to
00076bb
Compare
nwnt
force-pushed
the
nwnt/test-multiple-etcd-releases
branch
from
00076bb to
d8de9ed
Compare
|
/retest |
|
@serathius is the above test failure something I can do to fix? |
No |
tests/antithesis/Makefile
Outdated
|
|
||
| .PHONY: antithesis-docker-compose-up | ||
| antithesis-docker-compose-up: | ||
| export USER_ID=$(USER_ID) && export GROUP_ID=$(GROUP_ID) && docker-compose up | ||
| export USER_ID=$(USER_ID); export GROUP_ID=$(GROUP_ID); export VERSION=$(REF); docker-compose up |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| export USER_ID=$(USER_ID); export GROUP_ID=$(GROUP_ID); export VERSION=$(REF); docker-compose up | |
| export USER_ID=$(USER_ID); export GROUP_ID=$(GROUP_ID); docker-compose up |
| @@ -2,34 +2,44 @@ REPOSITORY_ROOT := $(shell git rev-parse --show-toplevel) | |||
| USER_ID := $(shell id -u) | |||
| GROUP_ID := $(shell id -g) | |||
| ARCH ?= $(shell go env GOARCH) | |||
| REF = HEAD | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not a huge fun of building from HEAD, what about unstaged changes? In robustness tests we have separate target for local running on local code and branch:
Local run assumes that etcd is already build and available in ./bin directory. User just need to call make build before.
Lines 64 to 66 in b7db556
For building from branches the build and run is combined.
etcd/tests/robustness/Makefile
Lines 15 to 29 in b7db556
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about the latest one I just pushed? I added a new target called antithesis-build-etcd-image-local which will build with unstaged and untracked local changes. This will allow building the current branch without having to stash the changes.
This involved a bit of refactoring, but I tested them all this time.
nwnt
force-pushed
the
nwnt/test-multiple-etcd-releases
branch
from
d8de9ed to
bae74bb
Compare
Signed-off-by: Nont <[email protected]>
serathius
force-pushed
the
nwnt/test-multiple-etcd-releases
branch
from
bae74bb to
d965118
Compare
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: nwnt, serathius The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
@nwnt: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/retest |
Fix #19944