On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 11:32 PM, Matthew Treinish <mtrein...@kortar.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 08:45:39AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> The tempest-full job used to run API and scenario tests concurrently, and if >> you go back far enough I think it also ran slow tests. > > Well it's a bit more subtle than that. Skipping slow tests was added right > before we introduced parallel execution to tempest ~5 years ago: > > https://github.com/openstack/tempest/commit/68a8060b24abd6b6bf99c4f9296bf418a8349a2d > > Note those are in separate testr jobs which we migrated to the full job a bit > later in that cycle. The full job back then ran using nose and ran things > serially. But back then we didn't actually have any tests tagged as slow. It > was > more of a future proofing thing because we were planning to add a bunch of > really slow heat tests we didn't want to run on every commit to each project. > The slow tags were first added for heat tests which came later in the havana > cycle. > >> >> Sometime in the last year or so, the full job was changed to run the >> scenario tests in serial and exclude the slow tests altogether. So the API >> tests run concurrently first, and then the scenario tests run in serial. >> During that change, some other tests were identified as 'slow' and marked as >> such, meaning they don't get run in the normal tempest-full job. > > It was changed in: > > https://github.com/openstack/tempest/commit/49505df20f3dc578506e479c2afa4a4f02e464bf > >> >> There are some valuable scenario tests marked as slow, however, like the >> only encrypted volume testing we have in tempest is marked slow so it >> doesn't get run on every change for at least nova. >> >> There is only one job that can be run against nova changes which runs the >> slow tests but it's in the experimental queue so people forget to run it. >> >> As a test, I've proposed a nova-slow job [1] which only runs the slow tests >> and only the compute API and scenario tests. Since there currently no >> compute API tests marked as slow, it's really just running slow scenario >> tests. Results show it runs 37 tests in about 37 minutes [2]. The overall >> job runtime was 1 hour and 9 minutes, which is on average less than the >> tempest-full job. The nova-slow job is also running scenarios that nova >> patches don't actually care about, like the neutron IPv6 scenario tests. >> >> My question is, should we make this a generic tempest-slow job which can be >> run either in the integrated-gate or at least in nova/neutron/cinder >> consistently (I'm not sure if there are slow tests for just keystone or >> glance)? I don't know if the other projects already have something like this >> that they gate on. If so, a nova-specific job for nova changes is fine for >> me. > > So there used to be an experimental queue tempest-all job which ran everything > in tempest, including the slow tests. I can't find it in the .zuul.yaml in the > tempest repo, so my assumption is that got dropped during the v3 migration.
It is there with name "legacy-periodic-tempest-dsvm-all-master" [3]. This runs as experimental and periodic for Tempest. It is not yet migrated, i will plan to migrate that in tempest repo. > > I'm fine with adding a general purpose job for just running the slow tests to > the integrated gate if we think there is enough value from that. It's mostly > just a question of weighing the potential value from the increased coverage vs > the increased resource consumption for adding yet another job to the > integrated > gate. Personally, I'm fine with that tradeoff. > > -Matt Treinish > >> >> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/567697/ >> [2] >> http://logs.openstack.org/97/567697/1/check/nova-slow/bedfafb/job-output.txt.gz#_2018-05-10_23_46_47_588138 >> ..3 http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/openstack-zuul-jobs/tree/zuul.d/zuul-legacy-jobs.yaml#n1579 -gmann > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@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-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev