Re: [Openstack-qa-team] Use of tearDown in tempest

2012-06-04 Thread David Kranz
Thanks, Daryl. This is a complicated issue and I will try to spell out my concern more clearly. On 6/1/2012 6:19 PM, Daryl Walleck wrote: Hi David, The per test fixtures are there for two reasons. One - stability. If we were to share one server among the tests, any of the previous tests taint

Re: [Openstack-qa-team] Use of tearDown in tempest

2012-06-01 Thread Daryl Walleck
Hi David, The per test fixtures are there for two reasons. One - stability. If we were to share one server among the tests, any of the previous tests tainted it or left it in a bad state, the rest of the suite would fail for unclear reasons. The second is for parallel execution. We cannot perfo

[Openstack-qa-team] Use of tearDown in tempest

2012-06-01 Thread David Kranz
I am a little confused about this. Most test classes define tearDownClass that frees resources allocated in setUpClass. But two of the classes deviate from this. ServerActionsTest uses setUp and tearDown and creates a new server in setUp. I think this means that a new server is created before