Ori Liel has posted comments on this change.

Change subject: engine: Add unit-tests for fence-proxy selection
......................................................................


Patch Set 2:

(12 comments)

http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/36419/2/backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/FenceProxyLocator.java
File 
backend/manager/modules/bll/src/main/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/FenceProxyLocator.java:

Line 181:     public FencingPolicy getFencingPolicy() {
Line 182:         return fencingPolicy;
Line 183:     }
Line 184: 
Line 185:     public void setFencingPolicy(FencingPolicy fencingPolicy) {
> Please remove this method. Fencing policy should be set in constructor and 
I disagree; There is no initialization involving the FencingPolicy which would 
prevent re-setting it, and no general object-oriented-programming principal is 
violated by providing a setter. 

The setter simplifies mocking in unit-tests. Usually design changes brought 
about by test needs are in line with good coding practice. Having said that, if 
this point is important for you I'll remove the setter and adapt the tests. 
This is hardly some major point worth arguing about :)
Line 186:         this.fencingPolicy = fencingPolicy;
Line 187:     }


http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/36419/2/backend/manager/modules/bll/src/test/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/FenceProxyLocatorTest.java
File 
backend/manager/modules/bll/src/test/java/org/ovirt/engine/core/bll/FenceProxyLocatorTest.java:

Line 48:                     
MockConfigRule.mockConfig(ConfigValues.FenceProxyDefaultPreferences, 
"cluster,dc,other_dc"),
Line 49:                     
MockConfigRule.mockConfig(ConfigValues.VdsFenceOptionTypes, 
"secure=bool,port=int,slot=int"));
Line 50: 
Line 51:     @Mock
Line 52:     private VDS vds;
> Please rename this to fencedVds or nonrespondingVds so it cannot be confuse
this VDS is used everywhere
Line 53: 
Line 54:     @Mock
Line 55:     private DbFacade dbFacade;
Line 56: 


Line 87:         assertNotNull(proxyHost);
Line 88:     }
Line 89: 
Line 90:     @Test
Line 91:     public void findProxyHost_ExcludesSelf() {
> I would also add positive test case (test this with another host in hosts l
Done
Line 92:         List<VDS> hosts = new LinkedList<>();
Line 93:         hosts.add(vds);
Line 94:         when(vdsDao.getAll()).thenReturn(hosts);
Line 95:         VDS proxyHost = fenceProxyLocator.findProxyHost();


Line 108:         assertNull(proxyHost);
Line 109:     }
Line 110: 
Line 111:     @Test
Line 112:     public void findProxyHost_ExcludesUnreachable() {
> Here I would also add test with another host.
Done
Line 113:         List<VDS> hosts = new LinkedList<>();
Line 114:         VDS vds = new VDS();
Line 115:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_2);
Line 116:         vds.setStatus(VDSStatus.NonResponsive);


Line 123:         assertNull(proxyHost);
Line 124:     }
Line 125: 
Line 126:     @Test
Line 127:     public void findProxyHost_ChooseTheSupportedCluster() {
> I would prefer 
Done
Line 128:         List<VDS> hosts = new LinkedList<>();
Line 129:         VDS vds = new VDS();
Line 130:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_1);
Line 131:         vds.setVdsGroupId(OTHER_CLUSTER_ID);


Line 141:         assertEquals(proxyHost.getId(), OTHER_HOST_ID_2);
Line 142:     }
Line 143: 
Line 144:     @Test
Line 145:     public void findProxyHost_ChooseByDCWhenNoClusterMatch() {
> I would prefer
Done
Line 146:         
when(vdsDao.getAll()).thenReturn(createHosts()).thenReturn(createHosts());
Line 147:         VDS proxyHost = fenceProxyLocator.findProxyHost(false);
Line 148:         assertNotNull(proxyHost);
Line 149:         assertEquals(proxyHost.getId(), OTHER_HOST_ID_2);


Line 142:     }
Line 143: 
Line 144:     @Test
Line 145:     public void findProxyHost_ChooseByDCWhenNoClusterMatch() {
Line 146:         
when(vdsDao.getAll()).thenReturn(createHosts()).thenReturn(createHosts());
> Shouldn't be here only one thenReturn() call?
It's called twice and the second time returned null until I added another 
.thenReturn(createHosts()
Line 147:         VDS proxyHost = fenceProxyLocator.findProxyHost(false);
Line 148:         assertNotNull(proxyHost);
Line 149:         assertEquals(proxyHost.getId(), OTHER_HOST_ID_2);
Line 150:     }


Line 148:         assertNotNull(proxyHost);
Line 149:         assertEquals(proxyHost.getId(), OTHER_HOST_ID_2);
Line 150:     }
Line 151: 
Line 152:     private List<VDS> createHosts() {
> I don's see a reason for this method, please move it's content into findPro
Disagree, I believe it makes the code more readable. In my eyes, ideally, any 
bunch of logic that can be given a meaningful name should be extracted to a 
method. That way the code tells a story: 

1) didA()
2) didB()
3) didC()

Any method which is longer than 10 lines should be regarded with suspicion and 
can probably be written better :)
Line 153:         List<VDS> hosts = new LinkedList<>();
Line 154:         VDS vds = new VDS();
Line 155:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_1);
Line 156:         vds.setVdsGroupId(OTHER_CLUSTER_ID);


Line 158:         vds.setVdsGroupCompatibilityVersion(Version.v3_5);
Line 159:         hosts.add(vds);
Line 160:         vds = new VDS();
Line 161:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_2);
Line 162:         vds.setVdsGroupId(OTHER_CLUSTER_ID);
> Do we allow same cluster UUID in different datacenters (I mean from DB poin
No, I'm almost sure the same cluster can't belong to two different data-centers 
at the same time.
Line 163:         vds.setStoragePoolId(FENCED_HOST_DATACENTER_ID);
Line 164:         vds.setVdsGroupCompatibilityVersion(Version.v3_5);
Line 165:         hosts.add(vds);
Line 166:         return hosts;


Line 166:         return hosts;
Line 167:     }
Line 168: 
Line 169:     @Test
Line 170:     public void findProxyHost_PreferUpHost() {
> I would prefer
Done
Line 171:         List<VDS> hosts = new LinkedList<>();
Line 172:         VDS vds = new VDS();
Line 173:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_1);
Line 174:         vds.setVdsGroupId(FENCED_HOST_CLUSTER_ID);


Line 191:     public void findProxyHost_FencingPolicySupported() {
Line 192:         FencingPolicy policy = new FencingPolicy();
Line 193:         fenceProxyLocator.setFencingPolicy(policy);
Line 194:         VDS vds = new VDS();
Line 195:         vds.setSupportedClusterLevels(Version.v3_0.toString());
> You don't need to lower supported cluster level version, because by default
I'll revisit this
Line 196:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_2);
Line 197:         vds.setVdsGroupId(FENCED_HOST_CLUSTER_ID);
Line 198:         vds.setVdsGroupCompatibilityVersion(Version.v3_5);
Line 199:         List<VDS> hosts = new LinkedList<>();


Line 204:     }
Line 205: 
Line 206:     @Test
Line 207:     public void findProxyHost_FencingPolicyNotSupported() {
Line 208:         FencingPolicy policy = new FencingPolicy();
> This test cannot work, because by default fencing policy instance is suppor
I'll revisit this
Line 209:         fenceProxyLocator.setFencingPolicy(policy);
Line 210:         VDS vds = new VDS();
Line 211:         vds.setSupportedClusterLevels(Version.v3_1.toString());
Line 212:         vds.setId(OTHER_HOST_ID_2);


-- 
To view, visit http://gerrit.ovirt.org/36419
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.ovirt.org/settings

Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I95f00b38c78ef7b6a72ee141d9090bf5e60eb679
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Project: ovirt-engine
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: Ori Liel <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Eli Mesika <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Martin PeÅ™ina <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Ori Liel <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Oved Ourfali <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: [email protected]
Gerrit-Reviewer: oVirt Jenkins CI Server
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
_______________________________________________
Engine-patches mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-patches

Reply via email to