On 11/26/2013 09:38 AM, Bob Ball wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Russell Bryant [mailto:rbry...@redhat.com] >> Sent: 26 November 2013 13:56 >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> Cc: Sean Dague >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Hypervisor CI requirement and >> deprecation plan >> >> On 11/26/2013 04:48 AM, Bob Ball wrote: >>> >>> I hope we can safely say that we should run against all "gating" tests which >> require Nova? Currently we run quite a number of tests in the gate that >> succeed even when Nova is not running as the gate isn't just for Nova but >> for all projects. >> >> Would you like to come up with a more detailed proposal? What tests >> would you cut, and how much time does it save? > > I don't have a detailed proposal yet - but it's very possible that we'll want > one in the coming weeks. > > In terms of the time saved, I noticed that a tempest smoke run with Nova > absent took 400 seconds on one of my machines (a particularly slow one) - so > I imagine that would translate to maybe a 300 second / 5 minute reduction in > overall time. Total smoke took approximately 800 seconds on the same machine.
I don't think the smoke tests are really relevant here. That's not related to Nova vs non-Nova tests, right? > If the approach could be acceptable then yes, I'm happy to come up with a > detailed set of tests that I would propose cutting. > > My primary hesitation with the approach is it would need Tempest reviewers to > be aware of this extra type of test, and flag up if a test is added to the > full tempest suite which should also be in the nova tempest suite. Right now I don't think it's acceptable. I was suggesting a more detailed proposal to help convince me. :-) -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
