[Gluster-devel] POC- Distributed regression testing framework

[Xavi Hernandez]

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 9:47 AM Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 12:54 PM Xavi Hernandez <jahernan at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 11:57 AM Deepshikha Khandelwal <
>> dkhandel at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello folks,
>>>
>>> Distributed-regression job[1] is now a part of Gluster's
>>> nightly-master build pipeline. The following are the issues we have
>>> resolved since we started working on this:
>>>
>>> 1) Collecting gluster logs from servers.
>>> 2) Tests failed due to infra-related issues have been fixed.
>>> 3) Time taken to run regression testing reduced to ~50-60 minutes.
>>>
>>> To get time down to 40 minutes needs your help!
>>>
>>> Currently, there is a test that is failing:
>>>
>>> tests/bugs/glusterd/optimized-basic-testcases-in-cluster.t
>>>
>>> This needs fixing first.
>>>
>>> There's a test that takes 14 minutes to complete -
>>> `tests/bugs/index/bug-1559004-EMLINK-handling.t`. A single test taking
>>> 14 minutes is not something we can distribute. Can we look at how we
>>> can speed this up[2]? When this test fails, it is re-attempted,
>>> further increasing the time. This happens in the regular
>>> centos7-regression job as well.
>>>
>>
>> I made a change [1] to reduce the amount of time this tests needs. With
>> this change the test completes in about 90 seconds. It would need some
>> reviews from maintainers though.
>>
>> Do you want I send a patch with this change alone ?
>>
>> Xavi
>>
>> [1]
>> https://review.gluster.org/#/c/glusterfs/+/19254/22/tests/bugs/index/bug-1559004-EMLINK-handling.t
>>
>>
>
> Yes please! It would be useful! We can merge it sooner that way!
>

Patch: https://review.gluster.org/21341


>
> -Amar
>
>
>>
>>> If you see any other issues, please file a bug[3].
>>>
>>> [1]: https://build.gluster.org/job/distributed-regression
>>> [2]: https://build.gluster.org/job/distributed-regression/264/console
>>> [3]:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=glusterfs&component=project-infrastructure
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Deepshikha Khandelwal
>>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 9:02 AM Nigel Babu <nigelb at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 7:28 PM Amar Tumballi <atumball at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> There are currently a few known issues:
>>> >>> * Not collecting the entire logs (/var/log/glusterfs) from servers.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> If I look at the activities involved with regression failures, this
>>> can wait.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Well, we can't debug the current failures without having the logs. So
>>> this has to be fixed first.
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * A few tests fail due to infra-related issues like geo-rep tests.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Please open bugs for this, so we can track them, and take it to
>>> closure.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > These are failing due to infra reasons. Most likely subtle differences
>>> in the setup of these nodes vs our normal nodes. We'll only be able to
>>> debug them once we get the logs. I know the geo-rep ones are easy to fix.
>>> The playbook for setting up geo-rep correctly just didn't make it over to
>>> the playbook used for these images.
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * Takes ~80 minutes with 7 distributed servers (targetting 60
>>> minutes)
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Time can change with more tests added, and also please plan to have
>>> number of server as 1 to n.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > While the n is configurable, however it will be fixed to a single
>>> digit number for now. We will need to place *some* limitation somewhere or
>>> else we'll end up not being able to control our cloud bills.
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * We've only tested plain regressions. ASAN and Valgrind are
>>> currently untested.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Great to have it running not 'per patch', but as nightly, or weekly
>>> to start with.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > This is currently not targeted until we phase out current regressions.
>>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Before bringing it into production, we'll run this job nightly and
>>> >>> watch it for a month to debug the other failures.
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >> I would say, bring it to production sooner, say 2 weeks, and also
>>> plan to have the current regression as is with a special command like 'run
>>> regression in-one-machine' in gerrit (or something similar) with voting
>>> rights, so we can fall back to this method if something is broken in
>>> parallel testing.
>>> >>
>>> >> I have seen that regardless of amount of time we put some scripts in
>>> testing, the day we move to production, some thing would be broken. So, let
>>> that happen earlier than later, so it would help next release branching
>>> out. Don't want to be stuck for branching due to infra failures.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Having two regression jobs that can vote is going to cause more
>>> confusion than it's worth. There are a couple of intermittent memory issues
>>> with the test script that we need to debug and fix before I'm comfortable
>>> in making this job a voting job. We've worked around these problems right
>>> now. It still pops up now and again. The fact that things break often is
>>> not an excuse to prevent avoidable failures.  The one month timeline was
>>> taken with all these factors into consideration. The 2-week timeline is a
>>> no-go at this point.
>>> >
>>> > When we are ready to make the switch, we won't be switching 100% of
>>> the job. We'll start with a sliding scale so that we can monitor failures
>>> and machine creation adequately.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > nigelb
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
>
>
> --
> Amar Tumballi (amarts)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20181004/8227140f/attachment.html>